Photoman V Scottish Power

[photoman]

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaggggggggggggggh hhhhhh!!!!!!!

 

Scottish Power !!!

 

NEVER have any dealings with these charlatans !!

 

 

Basically, was lured into switching my utilities to them last year after all the press and speculation about huge hikes in Gas and elec prices.

 

They promised me a monthly DD of £XX for Duel Fuel (which I have in writing).

 

I provided all the info they needed.

 

They then cocked up the transfer of the gas supply, and informed me they would be amending the DD to £YY ish per month to cover just the elec in meantime whilst it was sorted.

 

Then once gas was sorted, they informed me that DD would actually be £WW per month. Wasn't happy with the change, but as it was only a minimal change was still a saving on last supplier, and decided to continue.

Spoke to them, and they confirmed the DD would now be £WW pcm for duel fuel once gas transferred.

 

Then one day they took both the £YY AND the £WW by DD form my account on same day.. effectively meaning they were double charging me ... and, which also caused another DD to fail (with charges) !!

 

So, furious I cancelled the agreement citing section 1 of the Misrepresentation Act, and that the the contract was rescinded.

 

They didn't like this, and then tried to bill me for cancellation charges (and final bills based upon estimates) !!

 

Got into a bit of a battle with them, by telling them that due to heir own actions the agreement was null and void, and likewise also any provision for cancellation charges.

They're now threatening court, bailiffs etc, despite my offering to pay them any genuine liability based upon true usage (but no more, and no charges).

 

Short of it is, that I've now threatened them with court action also.

 

Basis of claim will be CPUTR08 offences (luring me into a deal under false pretenses etc) and Misrep. etc.

 

The crazy thing is, the difference in what I've offered compared to what they claim is only about £50.... which some muggins may have just paid from the off in order to get them off their backs.

But I'm not prepared to let them get away with this, as doing so gives them carte blanche to treat all customers same way, and this means millions in unlawful gains for them.

 

They've also registered defaults on my credit file, so another reason why I need to go to court.

 

They've committed so many offences relating to their obligations to handle matters too.

 

Sorry to ramble...... but they've just made me soooooooooo ANGRY !!

 

 

Photoman

Edited September 2, 2009 by photoman

[Alphageek]

Hi Photoman, I too think Scottish Power are a disgrace and think what they have done (above) is reprehensible.

 

I think it will be quite fitting if you use the DURKIN case to claim damages from Scottish Power for the default . That would have a nice ring of schadenfreude about it don't you think?

[photoman]

For anyone interested, here's what I've done so far regards a POC.

 

 

POC REMOVED WHILST LITIGATION IN PROCESS.

Edited September 2, 2009 by photoman
POC REMOVED DUE TO PROCEEDINGS

[photoman]

Hi Photoman, I too think Scottish Power are a disgrace and think what they have done (above) is reprehensible.

 

I think it will be quite fitting if you use the DURKIN case to claim damages from Scottish Power for the default . That would have a nice ring of schadenfreude about it don't you think?

 

 

I certainly DO plan to apply for damages here !!

 

This is not just my venting my spleen and spending hours dealing with this just to end up back where I started.... yet having wasted lots of valuable hours of my life !!

 

 

 

Please tell me a bit about Durkin ?

 

Links etc too if poss ?

 

 

I also recall that there is a limit of £1000 for a claim for dmages in Small Claims track.

 

Anyone know anything more about this ?

 

Thanks

 

 

P

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello PM!

 

Read and enjoy!

 

RICHARD DURKIN v. DGS RETAIL LIMITED+HFC BANK PLC, 26 March 2008, Sheriff J K Tierney

 

Cheers,

BRW

[MARTIN3030]

Not sure if the £1k is rigid.

[GamekeeperToPoacher]

Definitely subbing this - I used to work for them!!

 

GK

[photoman]

Guys,

 

Some advice here please ?

 

Have now done a POC for claim against SP.

 

Now about to fill in N1.

 

However, as my claim includes a claim for damages/compensation which I have not specified a sum for.

ie: I have indicated that this should be for the court should decide dependent upon remedies available etc.

 

What do I put in the boxes for "Amount claimed" & "Total" ??

 

Can I put something like TBA or such ?

 

Or should I amend my POC, and put in an actual claim sum ?

 

 

Any thoughts or advice here ?

 

 

PM

Edited September 2, 2009 by photoman

[photoman]

If I were to submit a specific amount for compensation I am thinking of adding something along the lines of:

 

1/ In King v British Linen and Co (1897) the loss to credit rating was valued at £100 where no specific damage could be shown. In 2009, this figure equates to over £9,975 (2008 estimate).


 

2/ In Wilson v United Counties Bank (1919) the award was £7,500 which would translate as over £17,000 with a current price index.


 

3/ In Richard Durkin v DSG Retail and HFC Bank (2007) provides a more recent guide with regards to the damage suffered as a result of a default and the claimant was awarded £8,000 plus an additional sum for the loss suffered in not being able to use credit in a normal manner.


 

 

 

 

Any thoughts ???

 

 

PM

Edited September 2, 2009 by photoman

[Alphageek]

If you leave it to the Court's discretion, then the court should issue it an "unspecified amount" claim.

 

If you are intending to add a clause like 4/ (above) then you should be mindful of the limits to keep the claim in SCT as if it goes fast track, then all bets are off as far as costs are concerned.

[photoman]

If you leave it to the Court's discretion, then the court should issue it an "unspecified amount" claim.

 

If you are intending to add a clause like 4/ (above) then you should be mindful of the limits to keep the claim in SCT as if it goes fast track, then all bets are off as far as costs are concerned.

 

Thanks Alpha,

 

The SCT limit is normally £5k, so if I specify such it should keep it within SCT.

 

However, as we all know, other factors are taken into consideration when courts come to allocate track; complexity of claim, etc.

 

I could even just submit for just £500 and still find the court allocates to Fast if it thinks the claim is complex or contentious.

 

So, I may as well submit for the top level of SCT at £5k on the presumption and hope it does go SCT, and then when it comes to AQ time also submit a plea for SCT with draft directions.

 

Thanks

 

PM

[photoman]

Hi all,

 

Okay, I filed my claim against Scot Power last week, and should be receiving confirmation of service anytime soon.

In the meantime I have received 2 more nasty letters from their hounds threatening court action. The last was headed "final notice".

 

Any suggestions on how to deal with these ?

 

ie: If I've already filed a claim regards such sums, can they also file a claim ?

My belief is that if the sums are already a matter of litigation on my behalf, then surely they cannot also file a claim?

 

Should I:

 

1/ Inform their DCA that the sums are already a matter of a court action, so they cannot file a claim regards the same sums (if so, should I do this by phone or by writing)?

 

2/ Wait, for them to file a claim, and then submit a defence citing my own claim ( I should also have a claim reference number by then)?

 

3/ Wait for them to file a claim, and then apply to the court to have both matters heard at the same time (if so, what is procedure, is it a standard form, perhaps an N244) ?

 

4/ Do nothing, then hope that my own claim gets allocated first, and then at such time bring up the matter of their own claim, citing their further behaviour at filing a claim whilst the matter was already a subject of litigation as being retaliatory/unlawful ?

 

 

Any suggestions anyone ??

 

Please !!

 

 

PM

Edited September 2, 2009 by photoman

[summer30]

we are struggling with these idiots at the minute as well, good luck

[MARTIN3030]

Usually you would add in the totals box on the claim form

"I do not know the total value of the claim but it is less than £5000."

[MARTIN3030]

1.They would need to address anything that you owe them by way of counterclaim.It is possible that this is what they may do.

 

2.Its unlikely that they would file a claim-utility companies almost always sell on the debt eventually.

 

3.I think you should just wait for their acknowledgement of service.

 

IMHO they wont be too keen to want to go all the way with this,you have certainly done your homework and they know it.

 

Nothing wrong with sending them a letter (their legal teams contact details will be on the ack of service)

and giving your proposals for settlement save further Court time and costs.

 

Its a good idea to do this early since if they know that they have a possibility to think about settling BEFORE having to submit a defence,then in some ways its favourable to them-because they dont have to show their cards.

 

What you need to establish,is whether there is any interest from them to settle-if so then you will need to give them an undertaking that you wont be seeking judgement if they fail to submit a defence,as long as settlement discussions remain ongoing.

 

This simply means writing to the Court manager saying that you agree to an extension of the timescale for the defendants defence,to allow settlement didcussions to continue.

Edited September 2, 2009 by MARTIN3030

[Rhia]

Just when did energy companies start entering information to the CRAs and when where and how has anyone given their permission for them to do this?

 

We had a claim from a DCA acting for pwoergen who said we still owed them £90 from about five years ago. Never checked to see if any adverse remarks.

We said prove it BTW and they couldn't. We're sure we didn't owe them anything at all. They went away.

 

Shocking PM they need sorting after all another group of corporates ripping off the public.

[Alphageek]

This simply means writing to the Court manager saying that you agree to an extension of the timescale for the defendants defence,to allow settlement didcussions to continue.

 

CPR 15.5(2) requires that any agreement between the parties to extend the time for filing a defence must be notified to the court by the defendant.

[MARTIN3030]

Yes I know I did not say it wasnt a requirement.

Where did I say that it had to be PM ?????????????

[Alphageek]

Well that's how I read it, so if I can make that assumption then I guess others could as well.

 

That's why I posted my reply.

[MARTIN3030]

Well now I have clarified.

In any event,Ultimately it is at the discretion of the court.

The other side is hardly likely to cite breach of CPR when it is initiated by an action which favours them.

My suggestion was also on the assumption that the deadline for the defence is due,or else fast approaching.

 

If settlement was agreed within the interim the defence becoming due,then it would mean filing a notice of discontinuence.

[Alphageek]

I agree with your suggested tactic of attempting to settle early in the proceedings. It would be in their interest to settle early sometimes.

[photoman]

WOW !!

 

Thanks guys.... you've all been so busy in my absence..... I really wasn't expecting so many replies !

 

Thanks !!

 

 

 

PM

Edited September 2, 2009 by photoman
LITIGATION IN PROCESS

[MARTIN3030]

PM.

I think there is a gameplan but that we should not go into the bare bones of it here.

I know CAG policy of dealing by PM and its not something thats encouraged,but there are times when its needed.

We are talking of stuff here that is treading on new ground insofar as CAG is concerned-that is to say,you would be hard pressed to find a case identical to this on a CAG search with Scottish power.

 

I have therefore sent you a Pm.

I am sure that CAG subscibers to this thread will understand that.

You can of course progress things here which are safe to do at this stage.

And ultimately give a full blown account of those things kept QT for the moment...later.

 

It makes sense to me,and I hope anyone else reading.

[photoman]

PM.

I think there is a gameplan but that we should not go into the bare bones of it here.

I know CAG policy of dealing by PM and its not something thats encouraged,but there are times when its needed.

We are talking of stuff here that is treading on new ground insofar as CAG is concerned-that is to say,you would be hard pressed to find a case identical to this on a CAG search with Scottish power.

 

I have therefore sent you a Pm.

I am sure that CAG subscibers to this thread will understand that.

You can of course progress things here which are safe to do at this stage.

And ultimately give a full blown account of those things kept QT for the moment...later.

 

It makes sense to me,and I hope anyone else reading.

 

THANKS,

 

I have temporarily removed the POC and anything which may possibly identify me from this thread.

 

PM

[MARTIN3030]

Good good