Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks @lolerzthat's an extremely helpful post. There is no mention of a permit scheme in the lease and likewise, no variation was made to bring this system in. I recall seeing something like a quiet enjoyment clause, but will need to re-read it and confirm. VERY interesting point on the 1987 Act. There hasn't been an AGM in years and I've tried to get one to start to no avail. However, I'll aim to find out more about how the PPC was brought in and revert. Can I test with you and others on the logic of not parking for a few months? I'm ready to fight OPS, so if they go nuclear on me then surely it doesn't matter? I assume that I will keep getting PCNs as long as I live here, so it doesn't make sense for me to change the way that I park?  Unless... You are suggesting that having 5 or so outstanding PCNs, will negatively affect any court case e.g. through bad optics? Or are we trying to force their hand to go to court with only 2 outstanding PCNs?
    • That is so very tempting.   They are doing my annual review as we speak and I'm waiting for their response once I have it I will consider my next steps.    The debt camel website mentioned above is amzing and helping to. Education me alot    
    • Sending you a big hug. I’m sorry your going through this. The letters they send sound aweful, and the waiting game for them to stop. But these guys seem so knowledgable and these letters should stop. Hang in there, and keep in touch. Don’t feel alone 
    • In my time I've never seen a payout/commission from a PPC to a landlord/MA. Normally the installation of all the cameras/payment of warden patrols etc is free but PPCs keep 100% of the ticket revenue. Not saying it doesn't happen mind. I've done some more digging on this: Remember, what your lease doesn't say is just as important as what it does say. If your lease doesn't mention a parking scheme/employment of a PPC/Paying PCNs etc you're under no legal obligation to play along to the PPC's or the MA's "Terms and conditions". I highly doubt your lease had a variation in place to bring in this permit system. Your lease will likely have a "quiet enjoyment" clause for your demised space and the common areas and having to fight a PPC/MA just to park would breach that. Your lease has supremacy of contract, but I do agree it's worth keeping cool and not parking there (and hence getting PCNs) for a couple months just so that the PPC doesn't get blinded by greed and go nuclear on you if you have 4 or 5 PCNs outstanding. At your next AGM, bring it up that the parking controls need to be removed and mention the legal reasons why. One reason is that under S37(5b) Landlord and Tenant Act 1987,  more than 75% of leaseholders and/or the landlord would have needed to agree, and less than 10% opposed, for the variation to take place. I highly doubt a ballot even happened before the PPC was bought in so OPS even being there is unlawful, breaching the terms of your lease. In this legal sense,  the communal vote of the "directors" of the freehold company would have counted for ONE vote of however many flats there are (leases/tenants) + 1 (landlord). It's going to be interesting to see where this goes.  
    • @Whyisitthisthank you very much for asking. I am still feeling anxious, especially when someone rings the doorbell, or when I receive a letter I feel a it paranoid. I stopped going to the shops unless I really have to. I shop online now. When I see security I feel paralised. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Debitas Legal Services


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4821 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

That's my experience too. I'm not actually bothered about them wasting their time and money ringing me. I just feel angry for those people of a more nervous nature who can be bullied and terrified by these pieces of ****

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Don't know if this thread's still live but I find that asking them to wait a minute while I switch on the recording machine really throws them. They get very defensive. I've been told it's 'not condoned', 'not usual' and even 'not allowed', I tell them tough poo, that it's my phone and I'll do what I like and if they don't like it they can feel free to stop ringing me - and not to worry coz I really won't be upset and take the hump about it. Then it becoes a stalemate, usually finishing with them saying the calls will continue and me just managing to say 'and I'll continue to record them' before they hang up on me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They phoned me again today and actually told me it was against the law for me to record conversations with them on my own phone. An arrogant thug who began to speak over me when I tried to reply so I let him whine on for a couple of minutes and said, "I'm terribly sorry - would you mind saying that again as I was totally ignoring you'.

 

Click

 

Bye, then....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes. It is now well past the 12 day deadline for the request I sent for the signed agreement copy. Nothing has arrived. Even allowing for the postal strikes it should have arrived by now. Sometime around Bonfire Night (fireworks for them) they will pass the 40 day limit for the SAR.

 

I wonder - if this is a CRIMINAL offence, has anyone here actually tried reporting them to the Police and seeing what happens? I know they aren't likely to be interested but it would be interesting. Might do it.

 

Also, with the election looming I am going to speak to our MP and see if he's remotely concerned. Anything that disrupts these skunks' day for them, even for a moment

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK - Get this, from CapitalOne received today:-

 

Dear Bilgey

 

'Thank you for your recent letter requesting copy documents for your account.

 

Please find enclosed a copy of your credit agreement as requested. In accordance with section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copy Documents) Regulations 1983, this is your original agreemetns, and if any terms have been varied, then the copy agreement will include the updated terms. In addition, your personal details, the signature box, signature and date of signature have been omitted from the copy provided as permitted under Regulation 3 of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copys Documents) Regulations 1983.

 

Your account is in default and the amount currently due and payable is *******.'

 

All they have sent me is a standard agreement with no details or signature. Neither have they deemed it necessary to explain how they come to the figure they allege I owe them. And Debitas are STILL phoning me. Am I missing something? I thought they were supposed to send a true copy of the original signed agreement and what's all that crap about being permitted to leave all the details out?

 

Does anybody know what they are talking about coz I don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what they do, they send any old rubbish in the hope that you won't know what is valid and what isn't. And because they aren't very bright, they persist in doing so even when it's obvious that you do know what's what :rolleyes:

 

There is little you can do to stop them harassing you on the phone whatever you write. You can either invest in a Truecall device, or get your phone number changed. I would advise simply ignoring the letters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Now they're REALLY beginning to hack me off:-

 

'...Thank you for your recent letter....with requests for information under the Data Protection Act 1998,

 

I would like to be able to help you with your request, but unfortunately the signature on the letter does not match the signature we hold on our system and under the DPA, I cannor proceed with your request......'

 

OK, so I signed my request letter slightly differently so that if it had been cut and pasted I would know but it must be obvious that it was written by the same hand, if indeed they do hold one at all and I suppose this means they must. The only difference would have been more or less of my name or initials.

 

So it looks as though we've reached a stalemate. What next, I wonder?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's easy :) You send the "in dispute" letter, and then you just sit back and ignore them until such time as they produce a valid CCA. They can play silly games all they like, but it's their problem, not yours. They cannot legally take any enforcemnt action while the alleged debt is in dispute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gazzer66,

 

Just searching for info on Debitas, as they have started calling me today, I assume regarding my Cap1 CC. It is currently in dispute and they disagree that they are harassing me by telephone! I have drafted another letter to send back to them tomorrow, but I just wondered what is the significance of the name and address you have put on the previous post.

 

Are you more likely to get a reply from this person? Oh and by the way, is his first name Brian?

 

My thread is here - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/199647-capital-1-cca-request.html

 

Any help much appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Twice I have asked Debitas who they are acting on behalf of & they have sent an identical letter to their last one. It appears it is probably Cap1 but they refuse to say. Have now sent them a nasty letter insisting they send me official documentation which they cannot possibly have. Watch this space.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
Hi Spelunkerer,

 

Send you letter recorded delivery (£1.15), it took me a couple of letters to get rid of them and they also sent Power2 contact knocking my door (twice)

 

They are welcome to knock on the door - I 'forgot' to give them my new address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
They are welcome to knock on the door - I 'forgot' to give them my new address.

Hi Spelunkerer. Got another letter from debitas saying last chance before they hand it over to another company. Probably power2contact who act for them and sent me a letter saying they had handed it back to debitas as they dont get involved in disputes. Lying gets as they will act on debitas`s instructions. They also state that they have not broken the data protection act and can hold my details on file. Again lies as account is in dispute. I have not replied bacxk to either of them.

Catch you later

Edited by lightningd
checked spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

I to am having problems with Debitas. Last august I set up a short payment agreement at the rate of £60 per month, to be paid by standing order. In the January of this year I started to receive calls at the rate of 3 or 4 a day. I knew by the number who they were. ( they actually use about 4 or 5 different numbers)

 

I eventually gave in and spoke to them. They insisted that the SO agreement had finished and that at new agreement had to be set up. I agreed and as the new agreement was only a couple of ponds more for 12 months i felt that this was ok. They insisted that the first payment be taken by debit card over the phone. I gave them the details and after a couple of attempts at trying to debit the cash from my account I started to give them details off another debit card and in the meantime checked my bank account on line. I noticed that they had already taken money via the SO so I managed to cancel the ongoing transaction over the phone and said that I would call again in the February. They were very demanding insisting that if i didn't call that the account would be given over to another collection company and probably taken to court.

 

In the February I called and started the new payment plan by debit card and placing the further payments by Direct Debit. However it was later that I noticed that yet again payment by the original SO had been also been taken.

 

I have tried on several occasions to explain that I would like that money refunded and what the implications of my finances would be if this did not happen ie a couple of my regular DD payments failing due to lack of funds, bank charges as a result etc etc.

 

Eventually I was told that I would have to speak to my bank and have them fax over a letter requesting the return of the money. When I spoke to the bank they showed me a copy of the SO which actually ended in the February. I asked if they could request the re payment of the money and they said that under the rules of SO's that this would not be possible.

 

I feel that I have been bullied into setting up this new payment agreement and therefore paying over double to them. They don't seem to want to listen or discuss anything unless it is on their own terms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...