Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi If you have went via a Mutual Exchange and this is to do with Social Housing/Housing Association then both parties need to firstly be approved by each parties Housing Association and accepted by them. Once this is done the relevant Housing Association for each will then get each party to sign a New Tenancy Agreement with the relevant Housing Association. So what we really need to know is: Does the other party to this Mutual Exchange know you have changed your mind on exchanging properties? Have they just signed an Agreement in principle to exchange properties? or Have they actually signed a New Tenancy Agreement for that Property? If they have signed a New Tenancy Agreement then this will make not now wanting to continue the mutual exchange difficult due to the New Tenancy Agreement being Signed. We really need to know what stage this is at to give correct advice
    • From unhackable communication networks to powerful computers, quantum technology promises huge advances.View the full article
    • going nowhere then. well if you've not been simply doing it to look the big cheese to your mates, you need to address why you are doing it. if its to impress your mates then simply stop being an idiot eh? , learn from it and go live your life . dx
    • Yes only with dwf. The first letter I received was explaining that I have not responded to the first letter they sent which I did not receive at all  then the second letter came, they said again saying we have not heard from you we are extending this another 14 days but at that point a couple of days before I called them on the phone saying I have received this and supposedly i owe money for stolen goods and that I need to see the breakdown which they then emailed to me dwf said this was what we were trying to send to you at first and I told them we have not received your first letter only one asking for demand of payment. On my second call to them I asked can you list the things that I have supposedly stole to which they replied “we normally have this on file but I can’t seem to find this on your file”   
    • oh well, at least your eign of terror is over now. so no contact directly since from/to sainsbury's. everything since has only been with DWF?
  • 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

192.com people finder


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3452 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

They say they have an audit trail in place so they can see when your data was purchased, how it was purchased and who etc.

 

 

I wonder how effective in fact that is.

 

As they go out of their way to highlight maiden names, (which are very usefull if you are a fraudster), I wouldn't trust a single word they say.

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 550
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Had a response today pointing out a few interesting things.

 

192.com only hold birth, marriages, death records from 1984 onwards. If a search is done relating to a pre-1984 enquiry an electronic request is sent to a company called findmypast.com.

 

So findmypast.com will be receiving a S10 notice.

 

I've been assured that in the future any information will be removed unless I change address in which case I need to write to them again.

 

They have also told me to write to them with my date of birth, registration district etc post 1984.

 

Letter was sent special delivery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid you may get 192 to remove the info, but the problem is there's dozens of companies out there doing the same thing & not all are based in the UK.

 

In my eyes one of the biggest offenders are the Mormon Church; this is their search engine for genealogy records, but they have a huge repository in Salt Lake City which holds all sorts of info & their intention is to catalogue everyone. Mormon Church (LDS) Genealogy / Geneology Records

Link to post
Share on other sites

My MP has written back already to tell me that he is writing to the NI security minister Paul Goggins to get him to investigate 192.com

 

 

Hmmmmm....worried Chilcot might find out where he really lives.

 

Only Joking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been checking on there myself. So much of their data is years out of date. I researched all my family on there just to see how much stuff they had. With my Uncle's details only one of my cousins came up as living there, so that info is likely to be 24 years out of date.

 

With my details it came up with an address I lived at up until late 2001. :rolleyes: And also a person who I've never met was living there at the same time according to 192.com.

 

Still going to send the letters and complaints etc. Just to cause them some extra hassle and work. :D

These are video links to show how I deal with Debt Collectors.

 

Fly fishing for C.A.R.S

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zPtzK8FqE6k&feature=related

 

Frederickson International don't accept my card type

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eiZBULlWW6Q&feature=related

Link to post
Share on other sites

well that was quick!

 

My MP has written back already to tell me that he is writing to the NI security minister Paul Goggins to get him to investigate 192.com

 

Wheels starting to turn ;)

 

Paul Goggins? Does his wife run the post office in Greendale? ;)

These are video links to show how I deal with Debt Collectors.

 

Fly fishing for C.A.R.S

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zPtzK8FqE6k&feature=related

 

Frederickson International don't accept my card type

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eiZBULlWW6Q&feature=related

Link to post
Share on other sites

But no harm in trying. If you don't try, you don't get. ;)

These are video links to show how I deal with Debt Collectors.

 

Fly fishing for C.A.R.S

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=zPtzK8FqE6k&feature=related

 

Frederickson International don't accept my card type

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=eiZBULlWW6Q&feature=related

Link to post
Share on other sites

the whole fact that anyone can buy data such as this is a crass dereliction of responsibility on the govt's part

 

Data regarding people in certain sensitive fields of employment should not be able to be bought

 

A Data protection breach like this by an IRA spyring almost brought the NI executive crashing down

 

I totally agree!

 

I work for a govt dept that handles data on the very type of people you mention. These people are regarded as 'protected population' for obvious reasons. The security measures and rules for handling their data is very stringent.

 

I would think that anyone in this situation who is complaining to their MP may want to point out that they are regarded as a member of protected population by the government. It might just make them take a bit more notice.....worth a try anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i did a search for my name and it came up that i shared a residence with my wife and my son. My son left home ages ago, and the register of electors was informed but my details are on the edited register. i did a check on my adress and it gave the first name of all the people that lived in my street except for my house. i think they still have me living at my last address which no longer exists! If I ask them to remove my details what info do i need to give them? Might it be better to leave them with the wrong details that are nearly 3 years out f date?

Link to post
Share on other sites

findmypast.com

 

for all information pre-1994

 

In the unlikely event that I ever research my family tree I won't be using that site. I've just entered the details of three seperate people who I know the birthdates, marriages & deaths of & they do not hold any record of them. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...