Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for that. I will give them till Tuesday. Thanks for your help, very much appreciated. 
    • Ok thanks for that, well spotted and all duly noted. Yes they did eventually submit those docs to me after a second letter advising them I was contacting the ICO to make a formal complaint for failing to comply with an earlier SAR that they brushed off as an "administrative error" or something. When I sent the letter telling them I was in contact with the information commissioner to lodge the complaint, the original PCN etc quickly followed along with their excuse!
    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
  • 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

horror 118's have bought all mobile numbers


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5394 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

believe it is 118118 who have bought the directory numbers for all mobiles registered in the uk, wonder how long it will be before the bottom feeding dca's start bothering us on our mobile phones now they can get access to the database.. another bad day for democracy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

My understanding is that they do not pass the number on, but rather act as an old-fashioned telephone operator and ask whether you wish to be connected. You can refuse to take any call, and can opt out of the "service" at any time.

 

Nevertheless I strongly feel that this scheme should be opt-in by default and not opt-out. More here:

 

Mobile directory made legal threats to get personal details ? The Register

Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if the PAYG is registered i assume?

Loads of them are not.

The whole thing is a farce anyway & whichever authority allowed this needs a slap :mad:

 

Ha Yeah! Would you believe, it was the ICO who approved it:eek:

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sent them a section 10 notice under the DPA withdrawing consent for them to use my data.

 

Let's hope they take more notice of it than the banks do.

Please note that I am not a solicitor or legally trained. The advice I give is from my own personal experience based on my own personal circumstance. If you choose to follow any advice I may give, please make sure you understand the implications of following that advice. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've sent them a section 10 notice under the DPA withdrawing consent for them to use my data.

 

Let's hope they take more notice of it than the banks do.

 

Who did u section 10 your provider or the new phone company?

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The new phone company, 118 800.

 

Your mobile provider has the right to process your data under a contract, 118800 don't

Please note that I am not a solicitor or legally trained. The advice I give is from my own personal experience based on my own personal circumstance. If you choose to follow any advice I may give, please make sure you understand the implications of following that advice. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was covered on 'Working Lunch' on BBC2. The lady fronting her cause for an anonymous mobile phone directory insisted we would all be happy with the service and gave an example of 'not being able to pick your child up from school and being able to call another parent to do so when you don't have their mobile number'.

 

It's a voice service and relies upon you accepting the call and recognising the voice asking for you. My problem with that is children have mobiles and someone can easily pretend to be someone else if they choose to.

 

The service has been shot down in flames by the amount of complaints and the, 'you can text or call to have your number removed' didn't wash. Why pay even a penny to have something removed when you didn't ask for it in the first place? So they are launching a free service online to remove your details within the next week but it's difficult to see how that will work if you don't know if they have your number in the first place.

If you provide your name and number to be removed are you just adding to their database? You could call and ask for yourself but that's just creating them more revenue.

 

They have obtained numbers every which way they can so even if you are PAYG but have given the number out to, say an insurance company they may have it under your name.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Better still, just don't have a mobile. I purposely trashed mine a year or so ago and haven't looked back. I hated the noise of it, my OH checking it and calling me and just the annoyance of having it with me like some electronic tag I'm expected to carry when I didn't even do the crime.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Better still, just don't have a mobile. I purposely trashed mine a year or so ago and haven't looked back. I hated the noise of it, my OH checking it and calling me and just the annoyance of having it with me like some electronic tag I'm expected to carry when I didn't even do the crime.

 

Lol, know exactly what you mean !

 

Ive just emailed my mobile phone provider to see if my details have been released without my authority.

The retailers worst nightmare !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps we should all email our provider to find out if they have done this?

 

Sounds good, perhaps a national day of contacting the mobile phone providers ! this should clog up there call centres too !

The retailers worst nightmare !

Link to post
Share on other sites

huge thanks elsa

 

maybe a sticky can be done?

 

laters angel x

Im happy to help with support and my own thoughts, but if I offer any thoughts to your problems please take it as from my life experience only and not of any legal standing. Always take further advice from the legal experts in your final action.:)

 

my new motto is,,,",Taking back control of your life and home - such peace is priceless"

 

This is all due to truecall device , have a serious peek at this you will be thankful like I am x laters angel :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am on an unregistered pay and go but it didnt stop Lowells calling me persistently on it for weeks together with texts (all unanswered)

I can only assume they got it after I gave the number to my insurance company for a claim I had with them.

I have opted out of this new service but after what I have seen, I wont hold my breath.

I feel a new number coming on that will be given to nobody but family and friends.

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

the question has to asked "WHY 4 WEEKS TO REMOVE"

 

and regardless of how they got the numbers, they have "NOT GOT THE CONSENT" to use them/DATA, they still require express permission to do so,

 

still waiting for a reply from them, why they will use the DATA without my permission, the point is they will still hold the DATA which they dont have permission to do so, and will not remove it, the EX-D is just a mask / tag on their system

 

I can see the ICO getting flooded with complaints not just my 2 so far

..

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can text an upper case E to 118800, to remove yourself from the database.

 

Fortunately, the mobile companies have resisted their advances for personal data. It appears that they are now relying on old databases for their info.

 

Raises all sorts of DP issues though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the question has to asked "WHY 4 WEEKS TO REMOVE"

 

and regardless of how they got the numbers, they have "NOT GOT THE CONSENT" to use them/DATA, they still require express permission to do so,

 

still waiting for a reply from them, why they will use the DATA without my permission, the point is they will still hold the DATA which they dont have permission to do so, and will not remove it, the EX-D is just a mask / tag on their system

 

I can see the ICO getting flooded with complaints not just my 2 so far

 

They may not actually have your data as the mobile companies have refused to give it out. That is I suppose, until you contact them to have it removed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just registered my number to be ex-directory - I've had to change it twice because the ex kept pestering me, what a nice nifty way for him to get my new one. This has ticked me off - with a landline provider you are given the option to become ex-directory, not something I have ever been asked by my mobile provider.

 

Not bothered about DCA's getting my number though..... :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...