Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Do you think I should send the CCA request now then instead of waiting? I really can do without the stress. Any advice would be appreciated. Thank you for responding.
    • How was the "receiver" appointed and what is their role? Appointed by the lender under the terms of their security on the loan (sometimes referred to as "LPA Receiver")? Or are they acting for you in insolveny? What's the current role of the agent?
    • Wait for more replies, but that letter to me can be interpreted as a letter before action. Ignoring it can have consequences. The court to impose sanctions for failure in responding to a letter of claim.
    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
  • 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

Robinson way by email??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5354 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

I have a Default on my credit file from Robinson Way.

 

So i decided to email them a CCA request, the same day i sent the email i had a 'out of the office response' sayin:

 

With reference to your recent email, please note any responses will be actioned accordingly by post and not by email.

 

Regards

 

Robinson Way & Co. Ltd.

 

I let the normal 12+2 days roll by and yesterday i decided to write back to let them know, this time i added a 'received' and 'read' acknowledgement to my email

 

So i got an automatic email to tell me the email was successfully sent to their servers and i received another automatic email to tell me the email had been opened and read.

 

If they dont reply to my warning letter, can you please advise me on where i go from here?

 

Thank in advance

Train hard...Fight easy

Link to post
Share on other sites

peed them off as they didnot get their quid,me thinks

 

SAM:pLOWELL DETESTER

 

 

Yep I guess you're right at that.

 

DG

I have no legal training my knowledge comes from my personal life experiences

Please help keep the forum alive by making a donation

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Robinson way placed a default against my credit file back in march, so i CCA'd them.

 

I got no responce at all, so i sent them the template after the 12+2 days was up. and again no response.

 

I decided to contact Experian and let them know they will not respond to me and that the Default was put on unlawfully.

 

Experian went away and got in contact with Robinson way for me, however Experian came back and said Robbers Way wont authorise them to remove the default

 

Any ideas on where i can go from here?

 

Thanks peps

Train hard...Fight easy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yews, they MUST have evidence they will rely on in court when they place a default on your account... Robinson Way are applying to have their licence renewed so a complaint to the OFT is a MUST... this company are causing me a lot of grief at the moment but I have my ammo ready.

 

The CRAs are a law unto themselves and should be closed down, a government organisation wouldn't be much better but at least they could stop some of the abuse - I object to paying to see who is trawling my file and the 'sale' of the data gleaned from the file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CRA's are data controllers in their own right,

it is there responsibility to ensure that an individuals personal subject data is in fact correct when it is recorded on an indiciduals credit file.

 

Clearly, the CRA's make no checks whatsoever, they just take the word as gospel from their clients.

If the information that has been processed by the Creditor and the CRA's is incorrect, that is a breach of the DPA.

 

We know it, they know it, but they will not remove the incorrect data

 

I myself, have two cases ongoing at present with Callcredit and Equifax about similar.

Link to post
Share on other sites

accesspwd,

 

I have changed the title of this thread.

 

Regards.

 

Scott.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yews, they MUST have evidence they will rely on in court when they place a default on your account... Robinson Way are applying to have their licence renewed so a complaint to the OFT is a MUST... this company are causing me a lot of grief at the moment but I have my ammo ready.

 

The CRAs are a law unto themselves and should be closed down, a government organisation wouldn't be much better but at least they could stop some of the abuse - I object to paying to see who is trawling my file and the 'sale' of the data gleaned from the file.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/213413-arghh-robinson-way-seeks.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone needs to challenge the whole legal basis of the CRA's to hold any info about individuals whatsoever.

Their attitude is "well we can" - errrr says who exactly?

They are not a government department so who or what gives them the right to hold info in the 1st place? :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we ought to start a new thread on the validity of CRAs to process our data... they linked me to the people I purchased my old property from, on the basis that a financial transaction took place. I calmly wrote back and stated that as I had done a financial transaction with them ie buying my file, they should link everybody in their firm to my address from the MD downwards... didn't get an answer back to that one! I'll do a thread called CRAS - Their Rights to our Data... and link to this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct Mr. Ton!

 

But unless one has a huge pile of cash in order to litigate against them, in order to acheive case law;

the CRA's will continue to process and process non factual/incorrect data.

 

Until the whole regulatory system is changed, they will continue.

 

Even the Banks themselves, do not consider that the data processed by the CRA's is sufficiently accurate and gives a full, correct picture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Robinson way placed a default against me this year and when i requested a CCA they didnt respond, when i sent them a reminded they didnt respond

 

So i contact Experian to query the Default, they themselves questioned robbers way but Experian came back to me and said they were not authorised to remove the entry..

 

I got another email today from Experian saying the following:-

 

Thank you for your email, which we received on 06 August 2009.

I note you are in receipt of our email dated 07/08/09 and I also note your subsequent email. Unfortunately, the information we hold is owned by the companies concerned. We are therefore unable to amend or delete their information without their consent.

If you think any entry in your report is wrong we are obliged to contact the lender to verify your comments or the validity of the entry and adhere to any instructions to amend the information. The lender is equally obligated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998 to ensure that the information they provide is accurate and up to date. If no amendment or deletion instructions are ordered we are unable to amend the information.

For further clarification of this you may wish to contact the Information Commissioner's office at the following address:

The Information Commissioner: Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF

 

 

 

In the email they said 'we are obliged to contact the lender to verify your comments or the validity of the entry '

 

That would mean they would need sufficient proof im in default correct?

 

How does a CRA check this and how does a DCA show the CRA it?

 

any advice would be great here folks

 

Thanks in advance

Accesspwd1

Train hard...Fight easy

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is where I belive the CRA's fall down they state the info belongs to the company making it, however your file and data should in effect belong to you, it is after all your data, so by rights (and this is my thinking only) it should be down to you, that if a dispute is in force, the info remains on your file. - and again did you give permission to robinscumway and / or any CRA to process your data - No CCA Agreement no permission

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, is there something we can do about this, because this has affected my credit big time.

 

Surely if enough people come together we can put a stop to it?

 

These are non-government companies, so how do they get so much information about us in the first place?

Train hard...Fight easy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...