Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've had a brief look over the thread and I see that there principle point is that he didn't take out insurance. Your answer to this is very simple – that it is absurd that you are required to pay to protect them against their own negligence or criminality of their employees or the people who are acting for them – in this case, Hermes.Your point here is that any requirement that a customer is required to pay extra to protect against the breach of contract is unfair within the meaning of the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act. Please have a read of the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act. In In particular, after you have read the sections within the act itself, get a schedule two and you will see examples of unfair terms. These are nonexhaustive which means that they are simply examples and lots of others can be added. An important point is that it forms a significant imbalance between your interests and their interests. They are using a standard form contract which is nonnegotiable. There is no competition because all the courier industry are doing this so there is no opportunity for you to go elsewhere and get a different type of deal. You will need to point out to the defendant – through the mediator – that included in the unfair terms provisions of the Consumer Rights Act is a provision that gives the court the power – in fact a duty – on its own initiative to examine the fairness or otherwise of any term. Point out to the defendant that if they want to go to court then you are happy about it. That you will then raise the question of unfairness to the judge and also you will invite the judge to look at the entirety of the contract and to pronounce on the fairness or otherwise of the contractual terms. Tell the defendant that you expect that the judge will decide unequivocally that a term of the contract which requires the customer to pay extra to protect themselves against the service providers breach of contract is grossly unfair – and in fact it is ridiculous. Basically they are saying "pay us to deliver your goods – and pay us extra if you don't want us to lose them."   Explain to the defendant that you are fully aware that this is a culture within the courier industry which has developed over 30 or 40 years or more but it's not acceptable and that when you get a judgement in your favour which confirms that the term is unfair, (as will surely happen) that you will then make sure that copies of the judgement find their way all over the Internet including social media that is concerned specifically with complaints against the courier industry and then the game will be up for the loss of them. One the mediator to tell the defendant that once you get this judgement, not only will people be claiming for ongoing lost items, but they will also be claiming retrospectively for legitimate claims which have been rejected on the basis of this unfair term. Make it clear to the mediator – that they should tell the defendant that you're not dealing with very much money here – and you are prepared to risk it all in order to go to court and to demonstrate this principle. If the mediator says that you should compromise then you should tell the mediator that if the defendant pays up in full – including costs and interest – that they will then be spared the problem of going to court and getting a judgement against them which will result in the loss of millions of pounds in the future. Tell the mediator that this is the benefit to the defendant and you are not prepared to hand them any further benefit if it means sacrificing a single penny of your claim. Tell the defendant to take it or leave it – you are happy either way.   It is very important that the defendant understands that you don't care either way whether you settle now mediation or goes to court. The defendant as a huge amount to lose if it goes to court. You have very little to lose  
    • Firstly I am disabled and have brain fog so can forget anything.  Today I went online to check when the MOT is due as just had to renew my car insurance and know it comes quickly after that. I was shocked to see my car was flagged as NOT TAXED.  I have had disability tax for years so dont even have to pay. After ringing DVLA I eventually found out papers had been sent to my old house which I left 3 years ago. With the stress of moving etc I never changed the car address but did change the address on my licence as that is correct.   Now I am worried I may have picked up a speeding ticket sometime in the 3 years and also maybe recently on a day trip to London (2 miles too fast coming out a tunnel). The old house is 150 miles away so cant pop in and no idea who lives there now. Thats how I got caught out with tax as they sent the paperwork there to renew. The lady renewed the tax easily on the computer for me which I was so grateful for and backdated it to 1 Feb. Can anyone tell me how I can find out if there are any tickets out there in my name that I know anything about please? I have had a really awful week with so many problems and this is now really making me feel sick so dont want to worry for months to catch up with me.   Thanks  
    • Presumably you have received your own NIP/s172 request after the lease company identified you as the person the car is leased to?   First thing to say is that, regardless of any questions over the date of the first NIP, you must still reply to your own NIP/s172 within the time limit given otherwise you are committing an entirely separate and more serious offence than any speeding infringement.  If you were the driver you should nominate yourself.   You need to be careful arguing that the first NIP was not sent out in time.  Note that it is only the first NIP that is subject to the 14 day limit, and that NIP needs to go to the Registered Keeper.  There is no time limit on subsequent NIPs.   So are you 100% certain that your lease company is the registered keeper and do you know that for a fact?  Please note that the registered keeper of lease vehicles is often not the lease company, but a finance company.   If the police are saying that the first NIP was sent to the RK within the time limit, you can be 99.99999% certain that they will have evidence proving that fact.  Assuming it was sent out first-class, there is a legal presumption that it was delivered two working days after posting, unless the addressee can prove it was never received.  So if the police are saying the first NIP was sent out within 12 days, the RK would have to prove it was never received within 14 days to provide a defence.  As you might imagine, that is very difficult to prove otherwise everybody would claim it.  Unfortunately, "reminder" NIPs are usually not marked as such and may be indistinguishable from the original.   So you need to confirm (preferably by sight of a copy of the actual V5C document as staff of lease companies do not always know) who the Registered Keeper is, and when they recived the first NIP.  If it was received after 14 days can they prove that fact (eg by a date received stamp and an appropriate system for dealing with mail received) and can they prove that they didn't receive an earlier NIP?   Hope that makes sense!  If it doesn't another poster called Man in the Middle will clarify what I 've not explained well or got wrong.
    • Simply confirming no mediation and the claim is proceeding to allocation.   Andy
    • Thanks for the swift response. Will continue to read around.   I have a date of march 10.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2775 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Can I ask which company did Wescot buy the debt from?

 

And how close is it to being statute barred?

Beating the DCA's day by day

 

My fight:

NDR - CCA'd 12+2 passed

Bank of Scotland - CCA'd 12+2 passed

CFS - Win by Technical Knock-out!:lol:

HFC Bank - CCA'd 12+2 passed

Chantry Collections - CCA sent

 

Time flies like an arrow

Fruit flies like a banana :D

 

<---------- Have I given you top advice, have I made you laugh, click on the scales, it won't hurt you! :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Can I ask which company did Wescot buy the debt from?

 

And how close is it to being statute barred?

 

I was almost going to say it was a Provident deal picked up by Wescot, but from what bsj is saying, it's something totally different.

 

I'm beginning to wonder if one owns the other... :confused:

My advice is given based on personal experience and any useful information I've picked up over the years. Always seek professional advice if there's any doubt.

 

<Please feel free to click on the star if you think I've been helpful

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting this, a company called Fresh Start called me this week on my mobile offering me a 'unique way to clear my debt' I said I wasn't interested and told the caller I was an active member of this forum and was quite capable of dealing with it myself. She then started on some spiel about 'getting it all tied up in one basket' and I told her again to vanish and not call again.

 

Provident lending their own ill gotten gains to pay their own extortionate interest loans sounds like a very back door way of clearing up their dodgy debt to become more 'legal'.

 

You only have to look at Credit Today to see how much Provident are 'forging ahead' in the current downturn.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting this, a company called Fresh Start called me this week on my mobile offering me a 'unique way to clear my debt' I said I wasn't interested and told the caller I was an active member of this forum and was quite capable of dealing with it myself. She then started on some spiel about 'getting it all tied up in one basket' and I told her again to vanish and not call again.

 

Mmm... the old Yes Loans technique :rolleyes:

 

You only have to look at Credit Today to see how much Provident are 'forging ahead' in the current downturn.

 

That explains an awful lot

My advice is given based on personal experience and any useful information I've picked up over the years. Always seek professional advice if there's any doubt.

 

<Please feel free to click on the star if you think I've been helpful

Link to post
Share on other sites
Borrow yourself a dog and next time he comes to the door tell him he has got 10 seconds to get off your property or you will let the dog out.

 

My dog is a great deterrant for salesmen. They take one look at her when she is looking out of the window and leave me alone.

 

I am putting a sign up next week saying 'Salesmen Welcome, Dog Food is Very Expensive.'

 

Lol,i have a very big german shepherd,he barked the whole time the guy was on the doorstep,he did look a little nervous:-D.

 

What surprised me is he was sent to offer a loan to pay off a debt and knew nothing of the OFT guidlines,so i taught him something:-D:-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting this, a company called Fresh Start called me this week on my mobile offering me a 'unique way to clear my debt' I said I wasn't interested and told the caller I was an active member of this forum and was quite capable of dealing with it myself. She then started on some spiel about 'getting it all tied up in one basket' and I told her again to vanish and not call again.

 

Provident lending their own ill gotten gains to pay their own extortionate interest loans sounds like a very back door way of clearing up their dodgy debt to become more 'legal'.

 

You only have to look at Credit Today to see how much Provident are 'forging ahead' in the current downturn.

 

It's called fresh start,it ask's me in the letter to quote that when i ring them for my loan.they will wait a long time.:p

 

They don't have my phone number and they won't be getting it,if by chance they do,my answer will be much the same as yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was almost going to say it was a Provident deal picked up by Wescot, but from what bsj is saying, it's something totally different.

 

I'm beginning to wonder if one owns the other... :confused:

 

 

I don't know as yet if the two companies are linked in anyway,i'm having a good look through providents website.

 

I started reading their company reports and have found nothing to link them as yet.

 

Fresh start is not mentioned on the site either,i would of thought it could be found under the services they offer,but thier's no mention of it.

 

I'm also interested to find out if they have a licence for collecting debt's.

 

I'm suspicious that provi are using the "Take out a loan and clear your debt's" route without having the authority to collect.

Edited by bsj
Link to post
Share on other sites
Can I ask which company did Wescot buy the debt from?

 

And how close is it to being statute barred?

 

I am not sure who wescott aquired the debt from.

 

It will statute barred in sept if my memory serves me correctly. I have heard nothing about this debt for a very long time.

 

Provi purchased the debt from wescott.

 

I'm tempted to get a copy of my credit report,but i'm a bit loathe too,as i have read here they possibly flag you up to DCA's.And i have a few small debts from this period,very bad time for me.

Edited by bsj
Link to post
Share on other sites
Complain to your mp and oft and make sure your mp knows you will not accept soundbites or spin but you want presure put on the oft to do there jobs

 

I have put in a complaint to the OFT and trading standards,i will be ringing them again monday morning to update them,i did tell the agent he is breaking the law by harassing me at my home over an alleged debt.

 

I shall follow up with a complaint to my MP on your advice just for good measure.:)

Edited by bsj
Link to post
Share on other sites

If it becomes statute barred in September then that puts you in an excellent position. I would just simply ignore them then send the SB letter when times up.

 

They probably full well know that it's becoming SB, and trying to do everything in their power to get you to pay up because they know they can do diddly squat after SB.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have put in a complaint to the OFT and trading standards,i will be ringing them again monday morning to update them,i did tell the agent he is breaking the law by harassing me at my home over an alleged debt.

 

I shall follow up with a complaint to my MP on your advice just for good measure.:)

 

 

Good for you! ;)

My advice is given based on personal experience and any useful information I've picked up over the years. Always seek professional advice if there's any doubt.

 

<Please feel free to click on the star if you think I've been helpful

Link to post
Share on other sites
If it becomes statute barred in September then that puts you in an excellent position. I would just simply ignore them then send the SB letter when times up.

 

They probably full well know that it's becoming SB, and trying to do everything in their power to get you to pay up because they know they can do diddly squat after SB.

 

That's the plan,i did get the impression of deparate measures when i received the letter,i don't have long to wait now,if things get heavy from provi i intend to send the prove it letter,i'll keep baiting till the times up.

 

And to think these people pushed me to the brink of suicide more than once in the past,older and wiser,but the credit has to go CAG.

I spent many months reading before i posted.

As they say knowledge is power:-D

 

A big group hug and flowers for you all,thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basic details for:

 

312029 - Wescot Credit Services Limited

 

Current status:No longer AuthorisedEffective Date:06/02/2009Tied Agent:Undertakes Insurance Mediation:Registered under Money Laundering Regulations:Address:PO Box 137

Dunedin House

45 Percy Street

Hull

North Humberside

HU2 8HF

Phone:

Fax:

Email:

Website:

44 01482 590 590

44 01482 590 591

[email protected]

 

Notices:Other information:

 

Found this from a link in an other thread,so wescott continue to sell on debts unlicensed? as well as collect.

Is this worth persuing in my complaint to the OFT? as they sold the debt to provident,will it be relevant?.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lol,i have a very big german shepherd,he barked the whole time the guy was on the doorstep,he did look a little nervous:-D.

 

What surprised me is he was sent to offer a loan to pay off a debt and knew nothing of the OFT guidlines,so i taught him something:-D:-D

 

I have a German Shepherd puppy. She is 7 months old and stands up at the window whenever someone knocks at the door.

:cool::cool: Blondmusic :cool::cool:
Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a German Shepherd puppy. She is 7 months old and stands up at the window whenever someone knocks at the door.

 

 

Another shepherd lover,nice to meet you.

Mine's 2 yrs old,he's a big softie untill someone approaches me.

He throws himself at the front door, full body slam and he has a bark to match his size,he 31inches shoulder height,i'm only 4ft 11in:-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I contacted the OFT and trading Standards today.

 

They are looking into wether provident are licensed to collect debt's as they are primarily a loan company.

 

I also informed them that wescott are no longer authorised.

 

They have suggested that that i contact the catalouge company to ask when and if they sold the debt on and to whom.

 

The advisor also said that as i had not heard anything in years it maybe statute barred,(i know it's not far off).

 

When i have all the info from said catalouge company i have to ring them back.

 

As it is so close to sb if i contact them will it be deemed as admition of alleged debt.

 

It did'nt seem very helpful to me really as i know the debt has been purchased by provident so i'm already aware it's been sold on.

 

The OFT clarified that wescott are no longer licensed to sell or collect any debt,i have to forward the letter to them i recieved from provident as they are going to look into their practices of buying debt's when they are a loan company.

Edited by bsj
Link to post
Share on other sites

O.k so i phoned the catalouge company for details of the debt,they were extremly helpful.

 

It was sold to Wescott 9/9/04 so it's won't be sb'd for another year "sigh"

 

Got the month right but not the year:(

 

Why did it take them so long to sell it on if they had it all this time i wonder.

 

I'll have to sit it now an see what comes back from our friendly loan company.Or see if they sell it on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The OFT clarified that wescott are no longer licensed to sell or collect any debt

 

That's very interesting, I had a try it on letter from Wescot last week over a Stat Barred debt. Did the OFT say what they are going to do?

Link to post
Share on other sites
statute baring runs from the date of last payment not the date they not the date they sell it on. So it probably is statute barred and you can tell them to fu*k off.

 

Now that's what i like to hear,i did stop paying approximatley a year before that,so in your words they can *&%$£ off then:-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
That's very interesting, I had a try it on letter from Wescot last week over a Stat Barred debt. Did the OFT say what they are going to do?

 

I had to e-mail the letter i recieved to the OFT,they said they will look into it.

It was music to my ears,i did post a reference to Wescott in an earlier post in this thread,thats where i found the info.

 

So i decided to bring to the attention of the OFT,fingers crossed they get closed down:-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
I had to e-mail the letter i recieved to the OFT,they said they will look into it.

It was music to my ears,i did post a reference to Wescott in an earlier post in this thread,thats where i found the info.

 

So i decided to bring to the attention of the OFT,fingers crossed they get closed down:-D

 

I think you should do it, especially in the light of what everyone else has said today

My advice is given based on personal experience and any useful information I've picked up over the years. Always seek professional advice if there's any doubt.

 

<Please feel free to click on the star if you think I've been helpful

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is statute barred, the date of sale has nothing to do with statute barring, the statute date is the last time contact was between you and the lender by way of payment.... if they say £1 was paid towards it just before it was sold ask for proof of who made the payment, you are entitled to this information.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you should do it, especially in the light of what everyone else has said today

 

 

Oh i definatley will see this out,I'll keep updating the thread:-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2775 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

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...