Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
    • Oil and gold prices have jumped, while shares have fallen.View the full article
    • Thank you for your reply, DX! I was not under the impression that paying it off would remove it from my file. My file is already trashed so it would make very little difference to any credit score. I am not certain if I can claim compensation for a damaged credit score though. Or for them reporting incorrect information for over 10 years? The original debt has been reported since 2013 as an EE debt even though they had sold it in 2014. It appears to be a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 13 and this all should have come to a head when I paid the £69 in September 2022, or so I thought. The £69 was in addition to the original outstanding balance and not sent to a DCA. Even if I had paid the full balance demanded by the DCA back in 2014 then the £69 would still have been outstanding with EE. If it turns out I have no claim then so be it. Sometimes there's not always a claim if there's blame. The CRA's will not give any reason for not removing it. They simply say it is not their information and refer me to EE. More to the point EE had my updated details since 2022 yet failed to contact me. I have been present on the electoral roll since 2012 so was traceable and I think EE have been negligent in reporting an account as in payment arrangement when in fact it had been sold to a DCA. In my mind what should have happened was the account should have been defaulted before it was closed and sold to the DCA who would then have made a new entry on my credit file with the correct details. However, a further £69 of charges were applied AFTER it was sent to the DCA and it was left open on EE systems. The account was then being reported twice. Once with EE as open with a payment arrangement for the £69 balance which has continued since 2013 and once with the DCA who reported it as defaulted in 2014 and it subsequently dropped off and was written off by the DCA, LOWELL in 2021. I am quite happy for EE to place a closed account on my credit file, marked as satisfied. However, it is clear to me that them reporting an open account with payment arrangement when the balance is £0 and the original debt has been written off is incorrect? Am I wrong?
    • OMG! I Know! .... someone here with a chance to sue Highview for breach of GDPR with a very good chance of winning, I was excited reading it especially after all the work put in by site members and thinking he could hammer them for £££'s and then, the OP disappeared half way through. Although you never know the reason so all I can say is I hope the OP is alive and well regardless. I'd relish the chance to do them for that if they breached my GDPR.
  • 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

Power2Contact have NO INTENTION of sending people round as they state in their letter - Phone recording inside


ar_123
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5306 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

Power2Conect 17th August

 

"We have been instructed by our client to VISIT YOUR ADDRESS TO COLLECT THE ABOVE DEBT"

 

...

 

"Within 72 Hours..."

 

 

Load of crap, its the 27th and no ones came, I'm disappointed, I bought some luxury biccies specially and waited in for 3 days only for no one to arrive!, needed to give them a call to find out where their "authorized collections officer" has got to.

 

Regrettably despite asking several times she wont send anyone round :x

 

Take a listen in the attachment :grin:

 

MODERATOR'S NOTE:

After checking, attachment re-instated

Regards, Rooster.

Power2Contact.mp3

Edited by Rooster-UK
See Moderator's note.
Link to post
Share on other sites

And what does she mean "you can't use the recording in court"?

 

She will have a nasty shock if you did produce it in court!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

And what does she mean "you can't use the recording in court"?

 

She will have a nasty shock if you did produce it in court!

 

The thing is I never told her I was recording from the start, to make it admissible as evidence I did need to tell her from the start it was being recorded. I knew if I did this however the call would have gone differently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is I never told her I was recording from the start, to make it admissible as evidence I did need to tell her from the start it was being recorded. I knew if I did this however the call would have gone differently.

 

As I understood it, you don't have to inform anyone that you are recording your phone calls, as no third party will have access to them, up until you produce them as evidence in court, which you will inform them, the claimant, that you have recorded phone evidence which you intend to use in your defence.

 

Unless you can show a link to the contrary, I record all of my phone calls as a matter of course, due to severe brain injury and really crappy memory, the only people I have told that all calls are recorded are friends and family, and the a select few other companies.

The bank being one of them.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I understood it, you don't have to inform anyone that you are recording your phone calls, as no third party will have access to them, up until you produce them as evidence in court,
Aren't we third parties??

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worth being clear on this recording business: you are perfectly entitled to record a telephone conversation by use of an acoustic tab for your personal use. You do not have to inform the other person you are recording it. Now, using the conversation in court would only be likely to happen if the other person denied saying something. You then say to them and the court, "well, I recorded the conversation for my own reference". Any judge worth his or her salt would say "come on, let's hear it then". There is no intrinsic infringement of anyone's rights by making the recording, as long as you have no intention of distributing it without good cause to third parties - that's where the problems start.

 

So, to summarise, yeah, the silly cow is talking tosh. What would her defence be? "I wouldn't have lied if I knew I was being recorded, Your Honour".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not very bright was she? And she appeared to be very hard of hearing too :rolleyes:

 

Actually, it makes my blood boil every time I haer the way they speak to people. And blatantly lie, with total impunity, breaking the law (in the form of the CPUTR) into the bargain :mad: :mad: :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting the way she said "you won't be able to get credit for six years". Well, that's not up to her, and to use such a statement is misleading and puts undue pressure on you. Worth a complaint to trading standards - don't tell them you have a recording, though,then see what comes of their initial investigation. Keep it up your sleeve!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is I never told her I was recording from the start, to make it admissible as evidence I did need to tell her from the start it was being recorded. I knew if I did this however the call would have gone differently.

No, don't think that you have to tell them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

cant listen to the recording!!

Link wont work?

 

Because it's been removed. Read the mods note..

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't we third parties??

 

Yes agreed, which is why CAGgers need to be very careful about posting their phone conversations on here.

 

Was funny mind..:D

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Recording has been re-instated.

 

Regards, Rooster.

If this has been useful to you, please click on the scales at bottom left of post. Thanks.

 

Advice & opinions of Rooster-UK are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Please use your own judgment.

-------------------------------------------------------

LOOK! Free CAG Toolbar.

Follow link for more information.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Please donate,

Help us to help others.

 

 

LINKS....

 

Forum Rules.

FAQs....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...