Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all, Love this site and it's no nonsense advice, have dipped in and out of the consumer forums over the years, mostly to assure myself that what I was doing was the right thing when dealing with various businesses (almost 100% success rate, thanks in part to reading and more reading here.). Anyway, the time is almost approaching where I might need to ask for some specific help and I have a couple of queries that I can't see definitively answered. Due to financial mismanagement and severe anxiety issues I stopped paying all unsecured debt in December 2018 (one slipped to the first week in Jan 2019 when the last payment was made having rechecked my bank statement from that period - all my unsecured debt direct debits were cancelled in early Jan 2019). This has left half a dozen debts;  a couple of credit cards, a bank loan, Shop Direct and some Hitachi Finance stuff having been sold on and passing the rounds through the usual suspects, Lowells, Link, PRA Group, others related to them, and then back to them again. I have somehow successfully managed to maintain radio silence and avoided anything more worrying than their begging letters.  I have blocked their phone calls and texts, bumped all emails to the spambox and had a chuckle at their desperate letters.  I've never had anybody at the door.  I have been at the same address since before I defaulted and all correspondence comes to my current home address.  I have NEVER contacted them or admitted any debt. In anticipation of them perhaps ramping up action at the last minute I've had a look at my credit report on Credit Karma (rec'd from this very place) and I see that the default dates on these range from May 2019 to November 2019. Also in preperation I've been reading, reading and reading lots here as advised. Obviously being in Scotland there are a lot fewer posts relating to these matters and it's always quite annoying when OP's do not follow up with any outcome on their cases - how rude! This has also left me a bit confused of when I am able to finally breathe easy (although cancelling all the direct debits in Jan 2019 was the biggest sigh of relief as I knew it was all going to be unmanageable and, well, default one, default all.). I've been reading that defaults should be filed 3-6 months after the missed payment but one of my larger debts was defaulted on 27th August 2019 when the last payment I made was 10th December 2018, meaning the first missed payment was 10th Jan 2019.   My query for now is - when should I infer that these debts are prescribed?  From when the payment was missed, or taking the default date plus 5 years from the credit report?   The three I have with the May date are moot anyway as either way they are gone - some letters from Lowell offering me 90% off to settle is what got me thinking these must have been near SB status, however I have one big 10k+ with a July date and another 10k+ at the end of August so I am feeling a bit anxious again, even though I know there is nothing to worry about with the begging letters.  Reading the various forums I am not sure why the OC's didn't take action against me when I read time and again the surprise that other posters haven't already been taken to court for lesser amounts - I'm also surprised I've avoided any action this long as there are plenty in this forum and sub forum who are whisked off to the court by the beggers minions after only a year or so after defaulting.  There are no CCJ/decrees listed on my credit report and I have not received any such judgements against me.  I still just regularly receive the begging emails to the spambox, the blocked phone calls and the letters from the they.   I'm also reading that there is no need in Scotland to send an LBC so what should I be looking out for to know that the time has come to engage with CCA requests etc?   I'm afraid in a fit I threw a lot of the paperwork out but I have a box of stuff I'm going to go through which may have the original letters from the OC's.   Thanks in advance for any advice.  
    • I'm at work now but promise to look in later. Can you confirm how you paid the first invoice?  It wasn't your fault if the signal was so poor and there was no alternative way to pay.  There must be a chance of reversing the charge with your bank.  There are no guarantees but Kev  https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09766749/officers  has never had the backbone to do court so far.  Not even in one case,  
    • OK  so you may not have outed yourself if you said "we". No matter either way you paid. Snotty letter I am surprised that they were so quick off the mark threatening Court. They usually take months to go that far. No doubt that as you paid the first one they decided to strike quickly and scare you into paying. Dear Chuckleheads  aka Alliance,  I am replying to your LOCs You may have caught me the first time but that is  the end. What a nasty organisation you are. You do realise that you now have now no reason to continue to pursue me after reading my appeal since you know that my car was not cloned. Any further pursuit will end up with a complaint to the ICO that you are breaching my GDPR.  Please confirm that you have removed my details from your records. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I haven't gone for a snotty letter this time as they know that you paid for your car in another car park. So using a shot across their bows .  If it doesn't deter them and they send in the debt collectors or the Court you will then be able to get more money back from them for  breachi.ng your data protection than they will get should they win in Court-and they have no chance of that as you have paid. So go in with guns blazing and they might see sense.  Although never underestimate how stupid they are. Or greedy.
    • Thank you. Such a good point. They did issue all 3 before I paid though. I only paid one because I didn’t have proof of parking that time, only for two others.    Unfortunately no proof of my appeal as it was just submitted through a form on their website and no copy was sent to me. I only have the reply. I believe I just put something like “we made the honest mistake of using the incorrect parking area on the app” and that’s it. Thanks again for your help. 
    • They are absolute chuckleheads. You paid but because you entered a different car park site also belonging to them they are pursuing you despite them knowing what you had done. It would be very obvious to everyone, including Alliance that your car could not have been in two places at the same time. Thank you for posting the PCN so quickly making it a pity that you appealed since there are so many things wrong with it that you as keeper are not liable to pay the charge. They rarely accept appeals since that would mean they lose money but they have virtually no chance of beating you in Court. Very unlikely that they will take you to Court given the circumstances. Just in case you didn't out yourself as the driver could you please post up your appeal.
  • 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

Think Capquest are trying to pull a fast one


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5457 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

Hope somebody can help me with this. Back in the summer last year capquest started hastling my partner for a debt with Barclays Bank. We sent a CCA and got back some blurry photocopies of what we think are bank statements but can't make them out. Along with this came a letter supposedly from Barclays saying Capquest were now in charge of the debt but having a degree in Graphic Design I'm pretty sure it's a fake because it's obviously printed on an Inkjet printer and the Barclays logo is low res.

Towards the end of Capquest letter it said she is in breach of a court order but as far as we know, no order exists.

Today she has been sent a letter which I'll type out below...

Barclays Bank plc v Miss xxxxxxxx

MANSFIELD County court. Claim No.: xxxxxxxx

Balance: xxxx

 

We regret that you have not responded positively to our previous correspondence and that the judgement against you entered on 15 MAR 07 remains unpaid. Enclosed with this letter is a statutory demand under the insolvency act 1986, which you should read and review carefully

 

All relevant information about the debt and as to how to deal and respond is set out in the statutory demand. It is important that you act by the deadlines stipulated. If you need help or clarification we would suggest that you seek the advice of a solicitor or reputable debt advisor.

 

If you fail to respond to the statutory demand we will be entitled to present a petition to the court seeking an order that you be declared bankrupt. Abankruptcy petition is a serious matter. Once it is issued we will not be permitted to withdraw it without the courts permission and any other creditors you have will be entitled to be heard. Significant costs will be incurred which you will be ordered to pay. Before considering this step, we are willing to give you one last opportunity to avoid possible bankruptcy. If you wish to take this opportunity you must contact us on 0870 084 3533

 

We trust that this can be resolved without the need to proceed to the bankruptcy stage

 

This is the exact wording of the letter. My question is, is this a load of bull**** as she has no knowledge of a judgement against her and they didn't supply a proper, signed credit agreement just some blurry photocopies of a couple of statements and what I believe to be a fake letter from Barclays (the dates do not add up)

 

Any help would be appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to get the Statutory Demand set aside. You have 18 days from the date of receipt.

 

You say this is a debt with Barclays Bank - is this a current account, overdraft, loan or credit card as they are all treated differently.

 

You will get more information if you serve a Subject Access Request on Barclays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's from a bank account that she had with an overdraft. Capquest want over 3 grand but she's adamant that the original debt was nowhere near that. How do you get it set aside?

I've told her to ring Barclays 2moro to find out if Capquest are supposed to be collecting on their behalf or whether they have bought the debt. Also told her to find out if they did get a court ruling

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of points dont ring true.

 

1. Why are they issuing a Stat Demand if there is already a CCJ issued on the alleged debt or so they say

 

How was the so called Stat Demand served on you

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of points dont ring true.

 

1. Why are they issuing a Stat Demand if there is already a CCJ issued on the alleged debt or so they say

 

How was the so called Stat Demand served on you

 

I don't really understand all this stat demand?bankruptcy petition lark. My missus got the letter yesterday from Capquest which read as I have posted above

 

Any help would be much appreciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a clue here - they cannot make you pay costs to a bankruptcy as they won't get priviledge over other creditors, however do the following

 

1. Check with Registry Trust that the CCJ stated is registered with tem - it should cost £8 to do online.

2. If it doesn't game is over and it is a scare tactic and should be reported to the OFT and Financial Ombudsman Service.

3. If the CCJ is registered then apply to the court to have it set aside on the grounds that a) you didn't get original paperwork, b) the amount includes inflated 'collection charges' - it will cost £75 to do this but will again get them off your back.

4. In the meantime send a CCA request to Capquest asking for all details of any court action taken on their behalf by third parties as well as themselves - this will again put the wind in THEIR sails.

 

If the stat demand was sent second class post (which I suspect is the case then it is invalid anyway.

 

When you are made bankrupt none of your creditors can claim precedence over each other - which Capquest may try, they are really out of order with this.

 

Do the above as soon as possible and they won't know what hit them... nothing is fair in war against the DCAs and their muppet solicitors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I've just looked at her credit history and found out that a ccj was made against her back in 2007. The problem is that it was made against her at an address she hasnt lived at since 2005. Any ideas where we should turn next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Follow what I have written above and apply to the court to get the CCJ set asise on the grounds she wasn't living at the addresws at the time it was granted.. If logic follows the Stat Demand should also be for the same address (which of course it won't be). It is a clear cut case of abuse of process.

 

 

Do what I stated above in no 3 and the whole matter will be resolved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...