Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • First of all, I'm not sure why you want to given 30 days to do the repair. It is excessive. I have the sense that you feel that you have to be reasonable in order to gain the approval of the court if that's the way it goes. You certainly should be reasonable but 30 days is excessive. Frankly I don't think that you should get the vehicle repaired by Cinch. They have undermined confidence. They have been notified of your quotation and the cause of the problem and they either haven't responded or they have declined to help. You have no way of knowing that if they are allowed to touch your vehicle, that they will do a quality job. I would suggest that the best thing to do is to get the vehicle repaired and then send them the bill. One them that this is what is going to happen and that if they don't pay you within seven days of receiving the bill then you will sue them. So I would book the car in for repairs on a date about 10 days from now. I would then inform Cinch in a letter of claim that the car is now booked in on XXX date. They have already had the inspection report in the estimate for repairs. You're paying the bill and seven days after that if they haven't reimburse you against the bill which you will submit to them, you will have them without any further notice. This will give them about 14 days to respond with the payment. You will have your car repaired and if they refuse – which they probably will – then you issue the claim papers without any more mucking around. If this appeals to you then draft a letter of claim which expresses this plan. Book the car in tomorrow for the work. Once you know the date then jiggle the dates of your letter around so that Cinch have 14 days before you sue them
    • TINY applies here... tough It's Now Yours.  its a person to person private sale  it's not covered by any rules/regulations at all. even if the MOT was fraud a county court claim is not the place to address this issue and most certainly not using the seller as any defendant against such, nor using it as an excuse to try and get out of buying the car and getting a refund. the claim is a dead duck. simply do AOS and file a defence stating this was a private sale between 2 private individuals, the car was test driven and the buyer found no faults nor were any aware of by the seller. dx
    • You can try & persuade them not to prosecute even up to minutes before the case is heard, approaching the prosecutor on the day. IF they agree, you’d have to be able to settle the agreed amount there and then, not by payment plan. You may find it hard to persuade them, but no harm in trying if your aim is to avoid a criminal conviction (which isn’t the end of then world…. Check out the NACRO and Unlock websites) if you don’t get offered an admission instructive settlement and it goes in front of the Magistrates Bench it will no longer matter about persuading TfL you won’t reoffend The circumstances might be offered to the Magistrates in mitigation, but in terms of if they find you guilty or not, it will be in the facts of if you failed to show a valid ticket when asked (which you didn’t, and it doesn’t seem you have any of the statutory defences, so a conviction seems inevitable IF TfL don’t agree an administrative settlement as an alternative to prosecution)
    • copy of some lease pages-compressed.pdfHello Lolerz I have uploded some pages of the lease. Working on some other paperwork but only have my phone so finding it slow.  
    • Thankyou very much for your help. There was no oil leak when it went for the mot and the buyer said the oil leak was after it broke down so around 10 days after he bought it. He said it had been taken to a garage who said the car had the hole in the engine block and believed it was a fraudulent mot. But we haven't seen any report.
  • 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
      • 160 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

Capquest Sold Disputed Debt on?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5344 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

Hi,

 

Just had a letter from Belfast Collection Services Ltd. threatening me with a "Doorstep Call".

 

This is regarding a debt that Capquest were chasing me for.

 

I thought companies were NOT allowed to pass/sell on debts that were in "dispute".

 

I sent Capquest a request about 3 months ago for a CCA (via template here) and never heard anything from them regarding this until now.

 

I have also informed them that this debt was also statute barred.

 

Can anyone advice me what to do regarding this new parasite?

 

Thanks,

 

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shocking....you must report them to the OFT....

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

Dear Sir or Madam,

Account number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

 

I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to yourselves, as it is in dispute with the **original creditor/DCA** and has been since (DATE) .

Not only is this a breach of OFT collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998

 

I wrote to Capquest on the (date) explaining that the alleged debt is barred by the statute of limitation act, and stating in no uncertain terms that I had no intention of making any kind of payment towards an alleged debt that is indeed barred by statue. I also sent off a request for a copy of my agreement on the (date) to date this has still not been supplied and Capquest fell into default of this request on (XXXXX)

 

Both Capquests and your own companys actions are in clear multiple breach of CPUTR2008 in line with the OFT's guidance on debt collection.

 

I now require your official complaints procedure, if you fail to provide this within 14 working days I will have no option but to inform the Office Of Fair Trading and bring into question both yours and Capquest's suitability to hold a licence. I am also considering legal action.

 

After taking advice, I am of the opinion that any continued pursuit either in writing or by personal contact is in violation of the Harrassment laws as well as CPUTR2008

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter, and await your official complaints procedures and confirmation that you will not be pursing me any further.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

BCS is part of Snotcall, and is essentially a one-woman show, operating out of an office over a shop on the Upper Newtownards Road. She may employ some freelance callers.

 

If they turn up (they don't actually fetch up most times), tell them to leave immediately, and call the PSNI if they don't go at once. Unlike some mainland police, PSNI do take such stuff seriously - claiming to be a debt collector could be an ideal way for a dissident to gather int or get close to a target.

 

BCS will be acting on behalf of Crapquest. Send them a letter reminding them that the matter is in dispute and say you want confirmation that they understand their obligation to suspend all collection activity until it's resolved.

 

Faugh A Ballagh!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

By coincidence, I had a letter from these clowns a couple of days after posting here. The letter threatened doorstep collection. I knew that this would not happen, so ignored the letter (the debt they are chasing is not mine anyway).

 

Today I had another letter, this time telling me that since I had ignored all their (non-existent) demands, they might now have to consider passing the account back to the original creditor.

 

I knew that they would not call, because the address they are writing to does not exist; it is an official phantom address I use because of my job. Letters are routed to my actual address; the street exists, but the house number does not. It's clear that they do nothing but send out template letters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wrote them a REALLY nasty letter threatening all sorts and they apologised and told me the debt had been passed back to crapquest!

 

Result!

 

I "should" really complain officially etc. etc. and contact Trading Standards etc. but they would probably close down and reopen, such is the quality of the company!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I "should" really complain officially etc. etc. and contact Trading Standards etc. but they would probably close down and reopen, such is the quality of the company!

 

Yes I agree, it would be awful to put them to so much trouble, and god forbid they were ever able to open a more reputable company that actualy knew and abided by Consumer Law!!:lol:;):lol:

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

BCS is part of Snotcall, and is essentially a one-woman show, operating out of an office over a shop on the Upper Newtownards Road. She may employ some freelance callers.

 

If they turn up (they don't actually fetch up most times), tell them to leave immediately, and call the PSNI if they don't go at once. Unlike some mainland police, PSNI do take such stuff seriously - claiming to be a debt collector could be an ideal way for a dissident to gather int or get close to a target.

 

BCS will be acting on behalf of capquest. Send them a letter reminding them that the matter is in dispute and say you want confirmation that they understand their obligation to suspend all collection activity until it's resolved.

 

Faugh A Ballagh!

 

better still tell them that you would love them to call but they must make an appointment with you as you want the PSNI to be there at the same time!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...