Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I suggested consideration of bankruptcy some years ago. It was not well received.
    • That is a superb WS. However, I have a few tweaks to suggest. In (2) "indicating" not "indication". I think to be consistent with your numbering, in (6) the Beavis case should be EXHIBIT 2. Do you really need to include over 100 pages of Beavis?  I think that would be likely to annoy the judge.  Just try and find the bit where they decide it was not a penalty due to having an interest in limiting the time that vehicles can stay. I'll have a look myself for this bit later as it's highly likely to be in WSs from PPCs who think that that paragraph means all their charges are valid always on every occasion. After your current (7) add this.  It's always useful to refer to a judgment when making a legal point - 8.  In the case PCM vs Bull, Claim No. B4GF26K6, where the Defendant was issued parking tickets for parking on private roads with signage stating “No parking at any time”, District Judge Glen in his final statement mentioned that: “the notice was prohibitive and didn’t communicate any offer of parking and that landowners may have claim in trespass, but that was not under consideration”.   In (14) if my maths are right the CPR request should be "EXHIBIT 3".  it is missing from your list of exhibits. In (16) the two figures should be £100 and £170.  They are entitled to increase fro,m £60 to £100, they are not entitled to increase to £170.  To make it clear for the judge I would write - 16. The Claimant has artificially inflated their claim for a £100 invoice to £170. This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims. 17. The Claimant has also invented a second fictitious charge, for legal representative's costs, when they have no legal representative. You also need ot number your exhibits. The rest is excellent - well done.
    • Did you ever think of walking away? Become bankrupt and in 12 months it'll all be behind you. My feeling is that you may well get nothing from the sale of the property anyway. Going by the date this thread started it looks like eight years of arrears, lender's costs and receiver’s fees on top.
    • Just to clarify - I make use of evening legal clinics. It is not always possible to see a lawyer (they have limited time and days/week).  This means questions one has may never get answered or there's weeks between follow-ups.   To be really clear - I am representing myself; I am playing at being lawyer/ barrister - which means I take help wherever I can get it (and then research it thoroughly). Ae - a judge in a recent hearing pointed out the receiver is not part of my current proceedings - and suggested I have a separate claim v the receiver. Disclosure has presented damning evidence v the receiver  The receiver against whom I have a complaint is not part of the receiver governing body.   The receivership is in 2 names - a joint one.  My complaint is directed at whom I was told is the lead receiver.  The other named receiver IS a member of the governing body.  But he has now left the company.  And the lead receiver has retired - but is still a working consultant on my case.   All the evidence shows it was the 'lead' receiver who was doing all the  work/ the misbehaviour.   But if the appointment was 'joint' would I make a complaint against them both?    I am sure that wouldn't go down well with the other receiver who is at the beginning of his career. The law is very much against borrowers.   But the evidence against this receivership is crystal clear.   I just don't know how and to whom to complain.   The places I've tried so far don't offer much transparency       
  • 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

Visit from Rob Way & Co debt collector


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5406 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

This one has been ongoing for a while now, but will try to keep it short!

 

The debt for around 3.5k was originally with Kays and token payments had been made to Robinson Way until July 2007, when I sent a CCA request and stopped payments.

 

The letter they sent in reply stated that I would not have a signed credit agreement, as I am deemed to have agreed to the t&c's when I placed my first order. I have received endless letters threatening court action etc since then.

 

Today, I had a debt collector knock on the door, took me completely by surprise as they had not mentioned this previously, I refused to deal with him, and he threatened that a bailiff would drive by my address to assess the value of my home and any cars on the driveway, nice! I asked when they had obtained a CCJ against me, they haven't, and made it quite clear that I considered his behaviour threatening and he was to leave my property immediately.

 

I have now prepared two letters to send to Robinson Way, the first to stop them calling at my door, and the second letter is the CPR request.

 

Please can anyone advise if there is something else I could or should be doing, and legally how do I stand with this one?

 

Dibs.

Don't know if i'm coming or going!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Angry Cat, thanks for your response. I have reported them and others several times and get absolutely nowhere, it's really frustrating that the guidelines are not upheld, but still intend to contact TS again.

Dibs.

Don't know if i'm coming or going!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

These new consumer protection rules came into force in May 2008. They are designed to stop traders acting unfairly including the use of what the rules call ‘aggressive commercial practices’. These rules may help you tackle harassment by your creditors because the OFT and trading standards now have the power to take enforcement action against creditors. This can lead to fines or even imprisonment if the creditor is found guilty of an offence.

 

The OFT has issued guidance on how they will take action under the rules. This includes examples such as:

 

•a debt collector pressurising you to repay a debt by contacting you at unreasonable times such as late at night or at unreasonable locations such as your workplace;

•a debt collector threatening you with action, such as use of bailiffs, to recover money for unenforceable debts.

If you think you may have a complaint about your creditor under these rules, contact Consumer Direct."

 

Trading Standards will have to do something about Robinson Way threatening you with the use of Bailiffs!

The CPUTR's have now been incorporated into UK Law.

 

Report Them!

 

AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

you could try this one- leaves very little room for them not to understand

 

Re Your Ref AccountXXXXXXXXXXXXx

 

I am anxious to resolve matters with regard to the above matter. You are not assisting in this respect by harassing me and causing unnecessary stress. .

 

Please stop making telephone calls to me. This includes my home and work landlines and/or my home or work mobile telephone numbers . It is very distressing , harassing and annoying to continually have to get up and monitor the telephone and filter out unwanted calls..

 

I Will not under any circumstances discuss this matter verbally over the telephone or in person.

 

Cognisant of the ever increasing threat of identity fraud and theft of personal financial information and data, it has been our family policy , for quite some time now, in dealing with all our bank , service and other financial providers that we never give personal security information or a part thereof to inbound telephone callers , nor do we discuss financial matters verbally.

 

The above policies also apply to personal uninvited callers to our home and for this reason I would also ask you to note that I would never agree at any time for you, your agents or representatives to call personally at my home nor would I ever discuss this matter with an uninvited personal caller, therefore please do not ask to make any such appointment. or use “threats” of personal calls to my home..

 

In light of the above it therefore follows , given that any further calls by telephone or personal uninvited call from you, your agents or representatives would never “get past” confirmation of identity nor would any “security “ information be disclosed , any further attempts by you to contact me in this way can only be seen (by a right thinking person) as an attempt to continue to cause further harassment and distress.

 

It may be the case that you were unaware of the reasons why I will not accept telephone calls and/or personal callers, however now that you are fully aware of the reasons , if you continue to ignore my request it will be at risk of formal complaints and possible legal proceedings and claims for damages.

 

 

 

 

- 2 -

 

 

It is also our family policy, in respect of dealings with bank , service providers and other financial providers to insist that ALL communications are in writing in order to avoid any dispute as to what may or may not have been said or done and to provide an audit trail of events. This can only be to our mutual benefit.

 

Whilst I appreciate that this is a very formal way of contact it does in fact allow the matter to be dealt with in a more efficient and businesslike manner..

 

I undertake to respond to written communication (excluding letters asking me to call you on the telephone or to make appointments or “threaten” personal calls to my home) normally within 7 days and certainly no longer than 14 days of receipt.

 

As a consequence of the foregoing you may therefore assume that any written communication from you which is not responded to by me within 14 days is likely to have not reached me and you may wish to re send the document- particularly if it is considered to be an important one.

 

May I also remind you that as holders of a licence to operate under the Consumer Credit Act it is your responsibility to be aware of and act within the rules of the CCA and OFT rules and guidelines and it is not for me to have to quote the legislation to you

 

 

I trust I have made my position clear and that we can now try to resolve this matter more amicably and efficiently .

 

 

Yours sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, that is an excellent letter and certainly leaves no room for any misunderstanding. It will be on it's way this morning!

Dibs.

 

As a consequence of the foregoing you may therefore assume that any written communication from you which is not responded to by me within 14 days is likely to have not reached me and you may wish to re send the document- particularly if it is considered to be an important one.

 

 

and this bit will fillet their donkey nicely in court if they come the old "we sent a letter and didn't get a reply from the defendant" cobblers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow! A doorstep debt collector they are very rare, what did they look like? Did you get their picture, good idea to either have a cctv or hold a digital camera with video recording capability when they arrive they will soon leave you alone as they don't like to be filmed or recorded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This one at least appeared to be educated, but it was clear that he was given very little info from Rob Way.

I have had a debt collector call round from Scotcall, he was wearing a really old, scruffy track suit, honestly thought he was beggar, well I suppose he was really, he tried to tell me that I would be taken to court for not giving him my husbands mobile number, he was a typical bully, told me he was a bailiff until I asked to see his licence, I suggested that he left the property before I called the police.

Don't know if i'm coming or going!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...