Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Hi everyone, Apologies for bringing up the same topic regarding these individuals. I wish I had found this forum earlier, as I've seen very similar cases. However, I need your help in figuring out what to do next because we've involved our partners/resellers. I work as an IT Manager in a company outside of the UK. We acquired a license from a certified reseller (along with a support agreement) and also obtained training sessions from them. The issue arose when we needed to register two people for the training sessions, so we used an external laptop for the second user to keep up with the sessions for only a month. During this period, the laptop was solely used for the training sessions. After two weeks, my boss forwarded an email to me from Ms Vinces, stating that we are using illicit software from SolidWorks. Since this has never happened to me or anyone we know, I went into panic mode and had a meeting with her. During the meeting, we explained that we were using an external laptop solely for the training sessions and that the laptop had not been used within the company since her email. She informed us that for such cases, there are demos and special licenses (though our reseller did not mention these types of licenses when we made our initial purchase). She then mentioned that we had utilized products worth approximately €25k and presented us with two options: either pay the agreed value or acquire SolidWorks products. We expressed that the cost was too high, and our business couldn't support such expenses. I assured her that we would discuss the matter with the company board and get back to her. After the meeting, we contacted the company reseller from whom we purchased the license, explained the situation, and mentioned the use of an external laptop. They said they would speak to Maria and help mediate the situation. We hoped to significantly reduce the cost, perhaps to that of a 1-year professional license. Unfortunately, we were mistaken. The reseller mediated a value €2k less than what Maria had suggested (essentially, we would need to acquire two professional lifetime licenses and two years of support for a total of €23k). This amount is still beyond our means, but they insisted that the price was non-negotiable and wouldn't be reduced any further. The entire situation feels odd because she never provided us with addresses or other evidence (which I should have requested), and she's pressuring us to resolve the matter by the end of the month, with payment to be made through the reseller. This makes me feel as though the reseller is taking advantage of the situation to profit from it. Currently, we're trying to buy some time. We plan to meet with the reseller next week but are uncertain about how to proceed with them or whether we should respond to the mediator.
    • Thanks London  if I’ve read correctly the questionaire wants me to post his actual name on a public forum… is that correct.  I’ve only had a quick read so far
    • Plenty of success stories, also bear in mind not everyone updates the forum.  Overdale's want you to roll over and pay, without using your enshrined legal right to defend. make you wet yourself in fear that a solicitor will Take you to court, so you will pay up without question. Most people do just that,  but you are lucky that you have found this place and can help you put together a good defence. You should get reading on some other Capital One and Overdale's cases on the forum to get an idea of how it works.  
    • In both versions the three references to "your clients" near the end need to be changed to "you" or "your" as Alliance are not using solicitors, they have sent the LoC themselves. Personally I'd change "Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept" to "Dear Kev".  It would show you'd done your homework, looked up the company, and seen it's a pathetic one-man band rather than having any departments.  The PPCs love to pretend they have some official power and so you should be scared of them - showing you've sussed their sordid games and you're confident about fighting them undermines all this.  In fact that's the whole point of a snotty letter - to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did do court so better to drop you like a hot potato and go and pursue mugs who just give in instead. In the very, very, very, very unlikely case of Kev doing court, it'd be better that he didn't know in advance all the legal arguments you'd be using, so I'd heavily reduce the number of cards being played.
  • 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 
        • 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

Serfarce Fraud/ deception lets get them!!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4605 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

Guest Happy Contrails
then charge me for solictors costs?

 

The Small Claims Track specifically excluses any party claiming solicitors fees.

 

The HCEO (or bailiff) will go to extreme length to fob you off with excuses and try forcing you into applying for a Detailed Assessment hearing. Accepting a Detailed Assessment hearing only gives the bailiff control of the proceedings. There is no obligation for the Judge to comply with legislation when making its findings, he does not advocate for the debtor and always works on the side of the bailiff.

 

ALWAYS use the Small Claims Track to recover unlawful bailiffs fees, you get full control of the proceedings and you have the bailiffs dancing to your tune. This is because court operates under the Civil Procedure Rules - which explicitly requires the Judge to comply with legislation in his judgments - and – the Judge has to advocate for you - the debtor, if you are unrepresented. If you win, the bailiff company gets a CCJ against its name (NEVER accept a "Tomlin Order" as a compromise) - and that scuppers their application to renew their Category E (debt collection) consumer credit license. The law - Section 21(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 - requires anyone trading in debt collection have a Category E consumer credit license. Applicants must have a 150% squeaky-clean credit rating before the OFT will grant a credit license. If the bailiffs cannot renew their license because of adverse credit information, then their careers as a civil enforcement officers is well & truly finished!!! The company will have to dissolve and reform with a new identity and guarantor (e.g. Drakes - now Marston), but if they continue trading in debt recovery without a license, they commit a criminal offence under Section 39(1) of the Act. That’s why bailiffs always pay very rapidly after filing the proceedings at court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 395
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The HCEO (or bailiff) will go to extreme length to fob you off with excuses and try forcing you into applying for a Detailed Assessment hearing.

HC Youve got me chuckling to myself

I suppose they can try to convince me to go that route but they cant really force me too or can they?

Accepting a Detailed Assessment hearing only gives the bailiff control of the proceedings. There is no obligation for the Judge to comply with legislation when making its findings, he does not advocate for the debtor and always works on the side of the bailiff.

We wont go that route then will we??

 

ALWAYS use the Small Claims Track to recover unlawful bailiffs fees, you get full control of the proceedings and you have the bailiffs dancing to your tune. This is because court operates under the Civil Procedure Rules - which explicitly requires the Judge to comply with legislation in his judgments - and – the Judge has to advocate for you - the debtor, if you are unrepresented. I am now the Claimant not debtor any more Ive paid em off!!!and too much to boot!!!

If you win, the bailiff company gets a CCJ against its name (NEVER accept a "Tomlin Order" as a compromise) What is a tomlin order? sorry I am being lazy and not looking it up- and that scuppers their application to renew their Category E (debt collection) consumer credit license. The law - Section 21(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 - requires anyone trading in debt collection have a Category E consumer credit license. Applicants must have a 150% squeaky-clean credit rating before the OFT will grant a credit license. If the bailiffs cannot renew their license because of adverse credit information, then their careers as a civil enforcement officers is well & truly finished!!! The company will have to dissolve and reform with a new identity and guarantor (e.g. Drakes - now Marston), but if they continue trading in debt recovery without a license, they commit a criminal offence under Section 39(1) of the Act. That’s why bailiffs always pay very rapidly after filing the proceedings at court.If they pay up then the CCJ is satisfied but thats not enough,will that stop them from getting their licence??

I want to get them for fraud if I win in court so have already written to chief constable

HC Thanks for your input

I have as I said earlier already filed the claim so lets wait and see what happens now

Onlyme

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails

A Tomlin order is a court order by consent of all the parties. A CCJ is unilateral and without consent of the party being sued. Tomlin Orders cannot be used for certain enforcement measures such as a 3rd party Debt Order. This the most popular method of enforcement against a firm of bailiffs – the money is debited out of their bank account - and often the bailiffs doesn’t notice until they get the execution fee letter from their bank afterwards.

 

A CCJ stays on their record until it time-expires, or the party being sued asks the court to set it aside. Until then its almost impossible to re-new a credit license because the OFT requires the applicant to be of perfect credit standing.

 

The police will drag their feet and look for excuses not to investigate. Their latest excuse is Police don’t have the recourses at this time. You counter this because police spend £950 an hour of taxpayers money chasing shoplifters and speeding motorists, ambushing them from behind bus shelters with an MD900 helicopter with civilian crew. You, at least want to be sure the bailiff is questioned under caution, and if the police fail to investigate then contact the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply recieved re complaint to police stating

'Go to OFT or Trading standards'

 

What a joke !!

 

Reply going back to chief constable asking them to try harder and re read my first letter and if no satisfactory action is taken that I will proceed to the IPCC naming any officers involved as perverting the course of justice.

 

onlyme

Link to post
Share on other sites

six times i have had the plod out my friend and only the last one knew the law when it comes to enforcement. and i will keep them comming until i have enough of them to put a complaint in, this is the only way i can find out how many police officers know what they are doing when it comes to bailiffs.

 

LFB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails
R I will proceed to the IPCC naming any officers involved as perverting the course of justice.

 

The IPCC is part of the same fraternity, the Parliamentary Ombudsman has more bite.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MMMM??? Wonder whos looking in?

 

I recieved notice today of a fee assessment hearing at the high court any guidance as to the correct route to handle this please send me a PM:???::???:

I am still keeping the CC claim in process

onlyme

Link to post
Share on other sites

MMMM??? Wonder whos looking in?

 

I recieved notice today of a fee assessment hearing at the high court any guidance as to the correct route to handle this please send me a PM:???::???:

I am still keeping the CC claim in process

onlyme

 

 

Sharfraud are looking in. that's who.

 

Hello Fools.

 

Hows business? :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails

The bailiff can ask for a detailed assessment hearing, thats their prerogative.

 

To be honest, the Small Claims Track (Civil Procedure) has been the only reliable way to recover unlawful bailiffs fees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails
If you lose at the fee assessment hearing this will undermine your claim and you could be liable for costs,

 

He cannot be ordered to pay costs, it was the bailiff who filed the application for DA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He cannot be ordered to pay costs, it was the bailiff who filed the application for DA.

 

High Court Enforcer, Happy Contrails is correct about the detailed assessment. :)

 

Are you referring to costs that may go against the claimant regarding the claim they have made against Sherforce if the claim is defnded successfully based on the outcome of the detailed assessment?:???:

 

If so, I would agree that losing at the detailed assessment would not help ohitsonlyme's claim...

 

:-?

Link to post
Share on other sites

High Court Enforcer, Happy Contrails is correct about the detailed assessment. :)

 

Are you referring to costs that may go against the claimant regarding the claim they have made against Sherforce if the claim is defnded successfully based on the outcome of the detailed assessment?:???:

 

If so, I would agree that losing at the detailed assessment would not help ohitsonlyme's claim...

 

:-?

 

 

Dont worry about my CC claim I have an ace up my sleeve(well probably 2 or 3) I cannot lose the judgment!!:) against sherfarce.

 

Just because we owed someone money due to naivity on my part and incompetence in the banking and legal fraternity, doesnt mean that we are stupid or unable to show the law is on our side

A thief is a thief and with the help of many on here and others I will win and give someone a bloody nose.

I want to stop these buliies from taking on others that are less fortunate with evidence and resources than I am.

 

Ohitsonlyme

Link to post
Share on other sites

High Court Enforcer, Happy Contrails is correct about the detailed assessment. :)

 

Are you referring to costs that may go against the claimant regarding the claim they have made against Sherforce if the claim is defnded successfully based on the outcome of the detailed assessment?:???:

 

If so, I would agree that losing at the detailed assessment would not help ohitsonlyme's claim...:-?

 

Yes, I was referring to the claim for judgment by ohitsonlyme, however, it would seem he is confident of success against Sherforce and their solicitors. We will have to wait and see I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails
it would seem he is confident of success against Sherforce and their solicitors. We will have to wait and see I guess.

 

That goes to show you know what your talking about. The small claims track cannot award solicitors fees to any party.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont worry about my CC claim I have an ace up my sleeve(well probably 2 or 3) I cannot lose the judgment!!:) against sherfarce.

 

Just because we owed someone money due to naivity on my part and incompetence in the banking and legal fraternity, doesnt mean that we are stupid or unable to show the law is on our side

A thief is a thief and with the help of many on here and others I will win and give someone a bloody nose.

I want to stop these buliies from taking on others that are less fortunate with evidence and resources than I am.

 

Ohitsonlyme

 

 

Couldn't have said it better me'self, and when you catch the thieves (get sucessful judgement), post it on here in all its glory.

 

Bet they try to do a deal before any judgment is obtained. Don't be tempted!

 

all the best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi To All

 

A couple of year ago I had Sherforce contact me and I paid up asap as I knew no better, can I request info from them, etc etc?

 

I cant even remember what it was for but they were very pushy, and I think they were related as I got the impression that the daughter was dealing for her dad...

 

What do you advise?

 

 

Mr W

Regards..Mr Worried :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails

You need some background information such as your bank statement showing payments to sherforce, contact the county court and find out the judgement amount and you can calculate the fees.

 

The law prescribing fees chargeable by a High Court Enforcement Officer (HCEO) for collecting unpaid debts is Schedule 3 of Regulation 13 of The High Court Enforcement Officers Regulations 2004. Broadly speaking it provides:

 

Where the sum due is £100 or less - 5%

Above £100 - 2.5%

Mileage Charges - 29.2p per mile Max £50

Seizure of goods - £2 per site

Signed Walking possession agreement fee (if you signed one) - £3.25 a day

 

That gives the amount plus lawful bailiffs fees, and subtract the amount paid to Sherforce as shown on your documents/statements. Ask sherforce to pay you plus interest 8% and pass a truth test on their fees. Wait seven days then file the claim in the small claims track.

 

If you dont have any proof of payment then just use the truth test letter and see what comes. Without any supporting evidence of payment you wont have much joy i'm afraid.

 

You can recover unlawful bailiffs fees up to six years from the date you paid them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't have said it better me'self, and when you catch the thieves (get sucessful judgement), post it on here in all its glory.

 

Bet they try to do a deal before any judgment is obtained. Don't be tempted!

 

all the best.

 

I wont be tempted !!!

I dont need my money back, and I know it is just sitting in the bank waiting for me

 

I do need some more guidance on the assesment hearing either PM me or if HCEO is a good guy he can post up the best way to proceed.

 

I realise I am up against professionals who should know the law (even tho they dont always apply it correctly)

 

All offers of help accepted but not necessarily followed

 

 

onlyme

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need some background information such as your bank statement showing payments to sherforce, contact the county court and find out the judgement amount and you can calculate the fees.

 

The law prescribing fees chargeable by a High Court Enforcement Officer (HCEO) for collecting unpaid debts is Schedule 3 of Regulation 13 of The High Court Enforcement Officers Regulations 2004. Broadly speaking it provides:

 

Where the sum due is £100 or less - 5%

Above £100 - 2.5%

Mileage Charges - 29.2p per mile Max £50

Seizure of goods - £2 per site

Signed Walking possession agreement fee (if you signed one) - £3.25 a day

 

That gives the amount plus lawful bailiffs fees, and subtract the amount paid to Sherforce as shown on your documents/statements. Ask sherforce to pay you plus interest 8% and pass a truth test on their fees. Wait seven days then file the claim in the small claims track.

 

If you dont have any proof of payment then just use the truth test letter and see what comes. Without any supporting evidence of payment you wont have much joy i'm afraid.

 

You can recover unlawful bailiffs fees up to six years from the date you paid them.

 

Hi

 

You mention unlawfull bailiff fees...I have paid various bailiffs over the years over the last few yrs, what can I do about this now?..if anything and is there a letter I can send?.

 

Cheers

 

Mr W

Regards..Mr Worried :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Happy Contrails

What kind of debt? theres letters for different types of debt collectable by a bailiff. And can you start a new thread - we are hijacking someone here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of debt? theres letters for different types of debt collectable by a bailiff. And can you start a new thread - we are hijacking someone here.

 

Hi Happy

 

I have no idea what it was for as it was over 2 yr ago, can I just not write to them and ask for the info?

 

Mr W

Regards..Mr Worried :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...