Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Standard form being sent to large numbers of claimants. Just answer as the form asks.  No need to  go into any detail, unless the forms asks for specific details of how health impacts on daily activities. If you are worried contact Citizens Advice as they are experts with PIP, as they are trained to understand what evidence is required for assessments.
    • Resume payments with the debt collectors? You say not to pay dca though do you not? 
    • yes they mostly would be enforceable, but that wasnt the point. even if they get a CCJ the very worst they could have done is get a restriction k which is useless to them. doesnt hurt anything. the CCJ would remain on file for 6yrs yes, but then gone same as a DN. the rest k charge does not show at all. and even so, the idea was to get your debts issued a default notice ASAP, them RESUME payments.. the advise is NOT conflicting, just you don't read things properly or understand.  oh well. dx
    • This is the dilemma I had then and still have it. The bit that stopped me was the post 2015 comments about them being enforceable now in most instances which I feel hasn’t been answered unless I am missing something. the bonus I guess is not all credit agreements now will be chasing me so less people chasing me down so to speak. this is the problem as there is conflicting messaging out there it is hard to plan a strategic way forward 
    • In 2017 my wife was given PIP and I finally, officially, became her carer. In 2019 she was reviewed and we were told it would be done by phone to make it easier for her as she has mobility issues and anxiety. The review was very simple, Has anything changed? No, ok, we'll stay as you are then. In 2022 a second review, this time by phone again but with an awkward given at the end for 5 years. Today, we got a new review letter (I know wait lists are bad, but I dont think the wait will take til 2027 for a decision). We're a bit confused because it's a letter, not a phone call as before. The form is just questions that ask "has anything changed" Now, since 2017, nothing has changed except we had our home adapted via disability grant. This was noted in the phone calls. So we should really write that nothing has changed in the last 2 years. The adaptations have been mentioned in both previous phone reviews, but not in writing so I guess we should bring it up. But we feel that they want us to explain everything as if it were a new claim again... And are worried if we miss something in the original claim or the phone calls she will risk losing part of the award (a 2 point swing could be really bad) It does just say "has anything changed?" But in dealing with ESA prior to getting PIP, answering the question asked "has your condition worsened or improved" at a review process with a simple "no, I'm still the same" somehow led to ESA ending and needing appeal. So just want a bit of guidance. How much detail is needed? Is minimal ok? Or should we be blunt with the fact nothing has changed, and bullet point the things she struggles with in each section?   I know the obvious thing is to just explain it all,but over 10 years the sheer amount of times the poor woman has had ESA or PIP stopped/refused just because something was missed out in their report, or they felt it meant a new claim should be made, or that they judged her healthy because we missed a tiny thing in our forms. During COVID it finally seemed like it was all just going to be smooth, especially with the phone reviews and the 5 year reward, but here we are. We just want to make sure we have the least chance to trip ourselves up, but making sure we have what is expected if you get me? I wish I still had a copy of the forms from 2017, because I could just verbatim copy them and add in about the adaptation, but (ironically) we lost our photocopies we kept of them when the house was being adapted
  • 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

Channel 4 Dispatches to air debt collection exposé


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5429 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 had a demand for payment from muck hall. They claimed that I owed nationwide building society £700 ish. In fact I have an active and in the black account with nationwide - to cut a long story short I got a PM which I have cut and pasted below. I have removed the name and contact detail of the person from C4, but if anyone would like them, I will happily PM them to you.

 

 

We have received information from (and spoken to) a company called Hardcash Productions who produce TV programmes for Channel 4...they want to interview people who have had bad experiences of DCA's (Blair Oliver And Scott is one of those they are keen to expose) Especially their tactics against the OFT's guidelines !!. They are known to us and their investigative jounalism is very good....If you want to have a chat with them to find out more. I have spoken to XXXXXX and she is very nice...and she identified your thread as being of great interest....if you want to contact her these are her details....I respect your privacy and fully understand if you didn't want to talk to them....but the more exposure of their tactics the better...Let me know...

 

Hope this is of interest - hope we dont crash channel 4 on the 20th!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

A Kilo of Semtex?

 

Do you mean to draw the regulator's attention to their ongoing flaccidity, or the use of HE to remove the cause of our complaints?

 

If the former, there is a risk of collateral damage leaving fewer regulators; I propose that some form of electrical cattle prod would be effective. If the latter, HE might do the job, but I suspect that an L115A3 would be far more satisfying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1st crud have had more than their fare share of expose

 

 

Indeed, but they also continue to be non-compliant, and that creature Nathoo remains as the Chairman of the debt-industry's bottom-sniffing club, the CSA.

 

1st Credit understand the situation perfectly; they are taking a calculated risk that the OFT, having eventually threatened them with serious action, will not have the testicular fortitude required to actually impose substantial financial sanctions or revoke their credit licence.

 

So far 1st Credit's strategy seems to be paying off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the OFT dont start issuing fines/taking away licences soon, then im afraid it will be left down to the general public at the end of its teather to take matters into their own hands.(vigilante style)

The DCA's have threatened everyone for too many years now - the public can only take so much :mad:

Edited by mr.ton
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been thinking much the same thing about politicians in the last few years, that the public will blow it's top. But I fear that I won't see any swinging from the lamposts down Whitehall in my lifetime. It's still nice to imagine it though :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the OFT dont start issuing fines/taking away licences soon, then im afraid it will be left down to the general public at the end of its teather to take matters into their own hands.(vigilante style)

The DCA's have threatened everyone for too many years now - the public can only take so much :mad:

 

but then if they do that then when a new batch of DCA springs up in their wake then the OFT has to start the ball aching process of issuing guidance, warnings small fines big fines all over again

 

far better to punish and strictly limit and control those already in existence-

 

 

Introducing legislation which makes the directors managers and individula staff personally liable for their actions - now there's a sanction worth pursuing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Credit Today understands that allegations include collection professionals putting undue pressure on vulnerable debtors, making premature threats of bankruptcy and chasing third parties and statue barred debts.

 

You'd think their industry website would get it right wouldn't you??? :D

Anyway...I think it's awful that debts shouldn't be able to have statues.

I'm thinking of having a statue of Dick Turpin for mine...

Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd think their industry website would get it right wouldn't you??? :D

Anyway...I think it's awful that debts shouldn't be able to have statues.

I'm thinking of having a statue of Dick Turpin for mine...

 

Don't you just love the professionalism of the DCAs and their murky entourage :lol::lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, If it is the Hardcash Production programme ,I know they were very interested in Marlin/Phoenix Recoveries tactics in turning unsecured debt into secured debt with charging orders at every opportunity. ooh exciting :D

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

They say money talks......mine just keeps saying "Goodbye"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Expect to see alot more guests sniffing about between now & Monday :cool:

 

 

Yes I'm still here, and no doubt still showing up as a 'Guest'.

 

If anyone has anything to say, don't let 'Guests' put you off, or references to 'Guests' - it is a tactic used by DCA's/Purchasers who want you to believe they know exactly what you do on CAG.

 

It's B........t.

 

Surprised it's still going on after all this time...(and so many explanations).........

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Marlin's MD has already been busy trying to defend his firm's behaviour. He thinks the programme might have an adverse effect on his drones:

 

Dunphy expressed concern over the welfare of staff and said the company is working with Dispatches to ensure none of them are put in danger by the programme. "It is a sensitive business and there are safety issues. We don’t want any of our people made vulnerable."

 

What sort of danger does Dunphy think might result from his company's bad practices being exposed. Will they be sent to patrol on foot in Helmand Province, something that is truly dangerous? Or does Dunphy imagine that someone may recognise a monkey in the pub and give him a good shoeing? I suspect the chances of either are remote, and that in fact Dunphy's nauseating words are designed to divert attention from the reality, which is that he has been caught red-handed. What a chopper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do find it strange that they specialize in threatening people, yet they are concerned for their employees personal safety....simple solution morons - stop the threats ;)

 

Impossible.

 

If Joe Public and Janet Street-Person knew the truth, nobody would ever pay any 'debt' if they hit hard times, and then we would really living in a world of .....'s '

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do find it strange that they specialize in threatening people, yet they are concerned for their employees personal safety....simple solution morons - stop the threats ;)

 

Indeed. Be the hard man when you have the advantage or can hide, then pish your drawers and pretend to be the victim when you're nicked. Classic bully behaviour.

 

I think Mr Dunphy doesn't like playing Big Boy's Rules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Mr Dunphy doesn't like playing Big Boy's Rules.

 

Or 'Rules of Engagement'

 

Unfortunately life is such now, that HMG (HMRC) will almost certainly support them, as they are a (ugly) source of revenue. We've seen all this before.

 

It's just a case of waiting to see which party can appeal to the majority and find the least painful path..........

 

A bit of internal diplomacy now will take you a long way - or perhaps appeal to the extremists.

That's not as crazy as it sounds, given the results of recent elections.

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5429 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...