Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • is the home in joint names but this is solely your debt? need far more history to be able to comment if it's paid off and was not just written of by one partly on their books and sold to anther, thus the cra file says £0. dx
    • So, Sunak has managed to get someone to 'volunteer to go to Rwanda hasn't he? .. for just £3000 payment to the person plus 5 years free board and lodging isnt it? - cost to UK taxpayer over £300M+ (300 million quid+) isnt it? - Bargain says Rwanda, especially with all the profit we made privately selling those luxury chalets Bravermann advertised for us   I wonder how many brits would jump at that offer? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Lets see, up to 5 years free board and lodging and £3k in my pocket .. I'd go - and like that person - just come back if/when I get bored. First job - off to Botswana for a week to see the elephants.   Of course the paid volunteers going to Botswana are meaningless - Rwanda have REPEATEDLY said they wont take any forcibly trafficked people in breach of international law eh? Have the poops actually got any civil servants to agree to go yet - probably end up as more massive payments to VIPal contractors to go and sit there doing nowt shortly eh?    
    • Hi Wondered if I could get a little advise please. I entered into a commercial lease (3 years) and within a few months I had to leave as the business I was trading with collapsed. I returned the keys to the landlord and explained the situation and no money, also likely to go on benefits but the landlord stuck to their guns. They have now instructed solicitors to send letter before action claiming just over £4000. The lease was mine and so the debt. I know this. I have emailed the solicitors twice to explain I am out of work and that with help from family I could offer a full and final settlement figure of £1500 or £10pw. This was countered by them with an offer to reduce the debt by £400, or pay off the amount over 12 months. I went back with an improved full and final offer of £2500 or £20pw. This has been rejected with the comment 'papers ready to go to court'. I have no hope of paying the £4000 and so it will have to go to court. Pity as I have no debts otherwise but not working is a killer. I wondered if they take me to court, could I ask for mediation? I also think that taking me to court will result in a pretty much nothing per week payment from my benefits. Are companies just pushing ahead with action even if a better offer is on the table? Thanks for your help.
    • Hi all, Many thanks for the advice! Unfortunately, the reply to the email was as expected…   Starbucks UK Customer Care <[email protected]> Hi xxxxxx, We are sorry to read you received a parking charge after using our Stansted Airport - A120 DT store. Unfortunately, the car park here is managed by MET parking. Both Starbucks and EuroGarages who own and operate this site are not able to help and have no authority to overturn any parking charges received. If you have followed the below terms then you would need to send all correspondence to [email protected], who will be able to assist you further. Several signs around the car park clarify the below terms and conditions: • Maximum stay 60 minutes, whilst the store is open. If the store is closed, pay to park applies. • The car park is for Starbucks customers only who make a purchase in our store, a charge will be issued if you left the site. • If you had made a purchase and required additional time, you must have inputted your registration number into the in store iPad which would have extended your stay up to 3 hours • To park in a disabled bay, you must have displayed a valid disabled badge. • If Starbucks was closed, you must have paid for parking as charges still apply, following signage located on site. • If you didn’t use the store, you must have paid for parking, following signage located on site Please ensure all further correspondence is directed to MET parking at the above email address, and accept our apologies that we cannot help you further on this matter.  Kind Regards,  Lora K  Customer Care Team Leader Starbucks Coffee Company, Building 4 Chiswick Park, London, W4 5YE
    • Thanks HB edited and re-uploaded. Thanks for the heads up 👍
  • 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

Robinson Way still Deny Debt Limitation


caryne
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5344 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

After sending Robinson Way the standard letter denying debt limitation I today received a letter saying the following:

 

"Further to your recent communication we do not accept that the above account is time barred under the Limitation Act.

 

Even if you were to demonstrate that this debt is time barred, the debt still legally exists and may be reported accordingly to the credit reference bureaux, as appropriate.

 

We are prepared, however, to offer you a substantial reduction to settle this account once and for all. Should you be interested in taking up this option please telephone us on the above number"

 

 

Now I know to ignore the last paragraph as that would just be me admitting the debt but I do not see how it is up to me to prove the debt is time barred? All they have sent me, so far, is the original agreement from 2001 and a letter which says, with no proof, that I last paid them £5.00 in September 2003. I know I would not have paid £5.00 on the debt as that would have been a daft amount to pay, I would have either paid nothing, the full amount or a regular monthly payment of more than £5.00. As I have said elsewhere I am not even convinced I still owe this debt as I paid several off in 2003 when I received a redundancy payment, sadly, after moving home several times, I don't have any records of any of my old debts or their payments, which were always in cash over the bank counter.

 

What I want to know is what do I do now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you did pay a fiver in September 2003 then it is up to RWay to prove that you did and precisely when. If this payment was made in the first half of Sept '03 then its slipped into statute barred-land again. I would just ignore them until they come up with the proof they are responsible for finding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they are right in the sense that the debt still exists, however, they havent a hope in hell now of getting it enforced in a court of law..tell em to sod off.. they know they have bought a debt they dont have a hope in hell of collecting on...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone. Just wondered if there was a standard letter or anything to write to them to tell them to prove it or get stuffed? I don't want to send the wrong thing and bugger up my chances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as your certain its statue barred then If it was me I would just ignor everything they send from now on and get on with my life.

 

You have made your position quite clear to them and if they want to waste money sending letters then thats there choice.

 

Its barred and nothing will unbar it and they can never force you into paying. Wheather you send a letter to them or not will still result in them sending you back some bulls**t letter designed to trick you into paying.

 

Ignor them and file the letters away. Have a nice life :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as your certain its statue barred then If it was me I would just ignor everything they send from now on and get on with my life.

 

You have made your position quite clear to them and if they want to waste money sending letters then thats there choice.

 

Its barred and nothing will unbar it and they can never force you into paying. Wheather you send a letter to them or not will still result in them sending you back some bulls**t letter designed to trick you into paying.

 

Ignor them and file the letters away. Have a nice life :-)

 

 

Yes, but how can I be certain? As I said, all I have from them is a copy of the 2001 original agreement with Capital One and a letter which claims I paid Capital One £5.00 in 'September 2003'. What I don't want them to do is find some loophole and take me to court.

 

Does anyone know if there is a standard letter to send these people asking them to prove that it isn't statute barred?

Link to post
Share on other sites

you could also complaint to the office of fair trading .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone. Just wondered if there was a standard letter or anything to write to them to tell them to prove it or get stuffed? I don't want to send the wrong thing and bugger up my chances.

 

I wouldn't send any letter just yet, especially if the last payment was allegedly in September 2003.

 

If and when you do communicate I would be inclined to send, what I call, the deny debt prove it letter...will add a link in a sec...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/573-general-debt-letter-if-you-know-nothing-of-the-debt

 

Also, this is the statute barred letter...which may be a bit premature at the mo given the dispute over the last payment...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/599-letter-sent-when-debt-is-statute-barred

  • Haha 1

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't send any letter just yet, especially if the last payment was allegedly in September 2003.

 

If and when you do communicate I would be inclined to send, what I call, the deny debt prove it letter...will add a link in a sec...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/573-general-debt-letter-if-you-know-nothing-of-the-debt

 

Also, this is the statute barred letter...which may be a bit premature at the mo given the dispute over the last payment...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/599-letter-sent-when-debt-is-statute-barred

 

 

 

Thanks but I have already sent them both of these, the first resulted in them sending me a copy of the 2001 agreement and a letter saying I paid in September 2003 and the second resulted in the letter I quoted at the beginning of the thread.

 

What I need, if there is one, is a letter asking them to prove the debt isn't statute barred, which is what they are currently claiming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks but I have already sent them both of these, the first resulted in them sending me a copy of the 2001 agreement and a letter saying I paid in September 2003 and the second resulted in the letter I quoted at the beginning of the thread.

 

What I need, if there is one, is a letter asking them to prove the debt isn't statute barred, which is what they are currently claiming.

 

 

Can only see this one...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/578-letter-to-dca-persistant-after-statute-barred

 

 

Nonetheless, I would still be inclined to ignore them until the end of the month!!

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can only see this one...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/578-letter-to-dca-persistant-after-statute-barred

 

 

Nonetheless, I would still be inclined to ignore them until the end of the month!!

 

 

Yes, that's the sort of letter. I won't send it yet but can anyone tell me if Gareth Thomas, the person named in that letter, still holds the position it says?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need to prove the debt is Statute Barred, see page 13 sect 2.14b Debt collection guidance - Final guidance on unfair business practices - oft664

 

 

Yes, I realise I don't need to prove it but I suspect just ignoring them won't work either as they are stating that they 'do not accept that the above amount is time barred under the Limitation Act'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that's the sort of letter. I won't send it yet but can anyone tell me if Gareth Thomas, the person named in that letter, still holds the position it says?

 

Don't think he does after a quick Google...just leave that bit out then.

 

As regards ignoring them...they have to reach a point where they "put up" or "shut up."

 

They think that the majority will be brainwashed into believing what they say if they repeat it long enough!!

 

Let's try and get September out of the way first...

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think he does after a quick Google...just leave that bit out then.

 

As regards ignoring them...they have to reach a point where they "put up" or "shut up."

 

They think that the majority will be brainwashed into believing what they say if they repeat it long enough!!

 

Let's try and get September out of the way first...

 

 

Yeah, I won't do anything till the end of the month.

 

Guess, I could try and find out who replaced Gareth Thomas, if no one else knows?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Come October, it will be interesting to see if they suddenly find that a payment of £5 was made in October 2003...

 

If you push this, and demand proof of the payment in 2003 (ie, where, when, how), they will get themselves in to an awful lot of trouble - but, as we've said previously, it depends whether you can be bothered.

 

Also, if you haven't acknowledged this debt in over six years - the definition of SB - then it should have fallen off your credit report. If it's still there, then there's potentially even more trouble for RW - reporting it after this long while trying to collect it and deny its SB status could be taken as vexatious. Keep the OFT and TS informed of what's happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Come October, it will be interesting to see if they suddenly find that a payment of £5 was made in October 2003...

 

If you push this, and demand proof of the payment in 2003 (ie, where, when, how), they will get themselves in to an awful lot of trouble - but, as we've said previously, it depends whether you can be bothered.

 

Also, if you haven't acknowledged this debt in over six years - the definition of SB - then it should have fallen off your credit report. If it's still there, then there's potentially even more trouble for RW - reporting it after this long while trying to collect it and deny its SB status could be taken as vexatious. Keep the OFT and TS informed of what's happening.

 

 

Well, I have got the letter from them where they say the last payment wa made in 'September 2003' so it will be interesting if they then find one from October 2003.

 

I would like to inform the OFT and TS but I'm not sure exactly what to say to them. At the moment it all seems a bit confused and I worry about saying the wrong thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The main contact with the CSA is;

 

Robinson Way & Company Ltd

201 Deansgate

Manchester

M3 3NW

 

Contact: Mr G Prosser

Phone: 0161 834 2861

Fax: 0161 832 1543

Email: [email protected]

Link: Robinson Way // Home

Service: ABCGL

Area: UK

Region: NW

Type: Full

 

 

Sorry, but I am a bit confused, why do I need this name/address?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...