Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Excellent news! Thread title updated. Please do consider a donation in light of the help received here. The help we give is free, but try telling that to our server hosts!
    • Hello dx100uk, After months of waiting for a response I finally got a reply and I must say it was the worst 4 months of my life the - fear of the unknown. So, they wrote back and said I was in the wrong BUT on this occasion they  would not take action but keep me on file for the next 12 months. It. was the biggest relief of my life a massive weight lifted -  I would like to thank you and the team for all your support
    • I have contacted the sofa shop who are sending someone out tomorrow to inspect the furniture. I suspect if anything a replacement will be offered although I would prefer a refund. Few photos of the wear in the material, this is how it was delivered.  
    • Yup, for goodness sake she needs to stop paying right now, DCA's are powerless, as .  Is it showing on their credit file? Best to use Check my file. All of the above advice is excellent, definitely SAR the loan company as soon as possible.
    • Hi all, I am wandering if this is appealable. It has already been through a challenge on the Islington website and the it was rejected. Basically there was a suspended bay sign on a post on Gee st which was obscured by a Pizza van. The suspension was for 3 bays outside 47 Gee st. I parked outside/between 47 & 55 Gee st. I paid via the phone system using a sign a few meters away from my car. When I got back to the car there was a PCN stuck to the windscreen which I had to dry out before I could read it due to rain getting into the plastic sticky holder.  I then appealed using the Islington website which was then rejected the next day. I have attached a pdf of images that I took and also which the parking officer took. There are two spaces in front of the van, one of which had a generator on it the other was a disabled space. I would count those as 3 bays? In the first image circled in red is the parking sign I read. In the 2nd image is the suspension notice obscured by the van. I would have had to stand in the middle of the road to read this, in fact that's where I was standing when I took the photo. I have pasted the appeal and rejection below. Many thanks for looking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- This is my appeal statement: As you can see from the image attached (image 1) I actually paid £18.50 to park my car in Gee st. I parked the car at what I thought was outside 55 Gee st as seen in image 2 attached. When I read the PCN issued it stated there was a parking suspension. There was no suspension notice on the sign that I used to call the payment service outside number 55 Gee st. I looked for a suspension notice and eventually found one which was obscured by a large van and generator parked outside 47 Gee st. As seen in images 3 and 4 attached. I am guessing the parking suspension was to allow the Van to park and sell Pizza during the Clerkenwell design week. I was not obstructing the use or parking of the van, in fact the van was obstructing the suspension notice which meant I could not read or see it without prior knowledge it was there. I would have had to stand in the road to see it endangering myself as I had to to take images to illustrate the hidden notice. As there was no intention to avoid a parking charge and the fact the sign was not easily visible I would hope this challenge can be accepted. Many thanks.   This is the text from the rejection: Thank you for contacting us about the above Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The PCN was issued because the vehicle was parked in a suspended bay or space. I note from your correspondence that there was no suspension notice on the sign that you used to call the payment serve outside number 55 Gee Street. I acknowledge your comments, however, your vehicle was parked in a bay which had been suspended. The regulations require the suspension warning to be clearly visible. It is a large bright yellow sign and is erected by the parking bay on the nearest parking plate to the area that is to be suspended. Parking is then not permitted in the bay for any reason or period of time, however brief. The signs relating to this suspension were sited in accordance with the regulations. Upon reviewing the Civil Enforcement Officer's (CEO's) images and notes, I am satisfied that sufficient signage was in place and that it meets statutory requirements. Whilst I note that the signage may have been obstructed by a large van and generator at the time, please note, it is the responsibility of the motorist to locate and check the time plate each time they park. This will ensure that any changes to the status of the bay are noted. I acknowledge that your vehicle possessed a RingGo session at the time, however, this does not authorize parking within a suspended bay. Suspension restrictions are established to facilitate specific activities like filming or construction, therefore, we anticipate the vehicle owner to relocate the vehicle from the suspended area until the specified date and time when the suspension concludes. Leaving a vehicle unattended for any period of time within a suspended bay, effectively renders the vehicle parked in contravention and a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) may issue a PCN. Finally, the vehicle was left parked approximately 5 metres away from the closest time plate notice. It is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they park in a suitable parking place and check all signs and road markings prior to leaving their vehicle parked in contravention. It remains the driver's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle is parked legally at all times. With that being said, I would have to inform you, your appeal has been rejected at this stage. Please see the below images as taken by the CEO whilst issuing the PCN: You should now choose one of the following options: Pay the penalty charge. We will accept the discounted amount of £65.00 in settlement of this matter, provided it is received by 10 June 2024. After that date, the full penalty charge of £130.00 will be payable. Or Wait for a Notice to Owner (NtO) to be issued to the registered keeper of the vehicle, who is legally responsible for paying the penalty charge. Any further correspondence received prior to the NtO being issued may not be responded to. The NtO gives the recipient the right to make formal representations against the penalty charge. If we reject those representations, there will be the right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator.   Gee st pdf.pdf
  • 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

DLC rears its ugly head again


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5242 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

I have a credit card debt with Egg (among many others!) and the debt was passed to DLC who I think are part of Egg because when I log into my Egg account it shows that I have made a monthly payment to Egg. However after a lot of battles with them I set up a regular payment of £65 per month - less than they wanted but I manage my dmp myself and that was all I could afford as I want to be fair to my other creditors. However they have now recently informed me that this payment plan was for three months only and they want to see my last three payslips. In the past I have declined to show my payslips to my creditors. Can I still do this - I really don't want them to see them, and I'm sure I'm not obliged to show them. As far as I was concerned the plan was until the debt had been repaid and I have an email more or less stating this. Any advice please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You tell them what you can afford not them tell you tell them firmly but fairly that this is the amount I can afford this is what I am prepared to pay and remind them nicely that no court will make you pay more than you can reasonably afford. Is your agreement enforceable?

I have no legal training, any knowledge I have has come from this forum, and my own experiences. Always balance up any advice you get with your own common sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since when do people have to provide details of payslips?.

 

Refer them back to their ORIGINAL email were upon they accepted your agreed payment plan. In my experience they always try and review accounts after 3 months anyway, just tell them your circumstances remain the same as when you set the payment plan up.

 

Regards

 

PB68.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to all who replied - great help - there is no ppi on this and I got my CCA from Egg which appears okay. However, now something else has happened. I emailed them saying that I was not giving them any copies of my payslips and that I didn't understand why they were asking me to set up a payment plan when I had already set one up and they get £65 by standing order. However they replied and said that this arrangement was for 3 months only and that they sent me an email to set this out and that I replied that I agreed to this. They enclosed a copy of these emails which were cut and paste jobs. My email was originally dated 14 Oct and I was saying thank you for them accepting my payment plan. However they changed the date to 16 October and sent their reply to my email only theirs was dated 14 October before I had even written my so called email on the 16 October! Their email - which I have never seen before went on and on and said they were bending over backwards to help me and putting their job on the line to help me and it would be better for me to give them a several thousand pound settlement. The email went on to say that I was to pay £65 for three months Oct, Nov, and Dec. Well I have never seen this email before it had no proper date on just 16 Oct no time or anything. And the one I sent was made up it was my wording but in reply to another of their emails - my one was written on 16 Oct but with no proper date or time (it was really written by me on 14 Oct). Is this fraud - I don't know what to think - but I am going to reply saying that both emails are fakes. I am going to scan them the proper emails into a pdf. They have really got a cheek and what's more their fake email to me which I have never received before today was illiterate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry about DLC - they are numpties and have all the power of a fruit fly. IF you are sure the agreement is enforceable (Have you posted it on here to have it checked) then pay them £5 a month and tell them that is all they are getting. You are in charge of this, not them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't get baited by their bull. They're not worth the effort. Save the bits of paper by all means. But as Pinky said - fiver a month and bog off.

 

This should have given you a clue how low this lot will stoop.

 

When I sent them my 'clear off' letter I also made it clear that I would no longer be using their wonderful online service. I've never logged in since!!!

 

In writing means in writing. Don't negotiate this right away - in time it will become one of your greatest weapons.

 

M

Edited by MandM
typo

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pinky69 - thanks for this but I can't believe that they go around faking emails surely they shouldn't be allowed to behave like this. I think the agreement probably isn't okay but I owe so much to so many creditors that bar one or two and now DLC again I have had a harmonious life these last few months paying them regular sums and for the main part not being charged interest or charges I'm too ashamed to say how much I owe but let's just say I will be dead before it's all paid off. So because of all this I don't at this stage want to go down the enforeceable agreement route.

 

Christmas 2008 I was in such a dreadful state with my debts. Every day I had to go to at least five cash points to try and draw out money from credit cards to pay other cards with and this has been going on for years. In May 2009 I faced up to my debt and admitted it to myself and wrote to all my creditors. Now I have just enough money to get through each month but Christmas 2009 I slept easily in my bed. At the moment, I am okay, I am fortunate enough to be in employment and so can afford to pay my utility bills but not my credit cards and I have loads of them. My creditors don't seem to like the fact that I can pay my utility bills and my mortgage and not them though! I know that my situation could change any minute but for the time being I don't want to upset the applecart too much. I have got a lot of help from this website, I now know I'm not alone and it is good to chat to people in the same situation as yourself. I do think that DLC shouldn't be allowed to fake emails though.

 

There is all this talk about agreements not being enforceable but I haven't read anywhere that anyone has been successful going down this route and had their debt written off because of it - or am I wrong.

 

I was trying to get £800 bank charges back from First Direct and now it looks as if it never will! Thanks everyone for your help -when I have received another reply from DLC I will let you know. If I have the wrong idea about the unenforceable agreement and the fact no one has seemed to get very far with this, then please let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had £48000 of debt written off by banks and DCAs because they had no enforceable agreements and it is worth pointing out to you that DLC paid less than £600 for your debt, less than 10p in the £1, the rest is profit to them. I wouldn't give these scavengers a penny if the agreement wasn't enforceable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should worry too much about dlc by what I've read on the forum.

 

I'm currently dealing with them on my OH's behalf, Egg passed the account to

dlc even though Egg are in default of our cca request by 7 months, dlc have been phoning (before letter contact) then a letter saying they want to help & then another saying their disappointed OH wont talk to them, so sent THEM a cca request & it was returned saying it has to be made direct to Egg as they arent allowed to pass it to their client, £1 PO was also returned with instructions to make it payable to Egg & write the account number on the reverse (yeah right - in doing so would acknowledge the debt).

 

If its an old card its probably got the infamous 'Approved' limit instead of 'Credit' limit.

 

Next contact from them & the reply will be 'Feck Off' as Father Jack says :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone you have all been so helpful - Pinky well done on getting dosh back. Although Egg passed the account to DLC and DLC keep telling me that they owe the debt I can still access the details online on the Egg website, which is the only way I can check my debt is going down which I think is strange. I think I do have the old card with "Approved" but as I've said before I have so many credit cards - I am ashamed to say how many - I already deal with another debt collector as well! So I'm trying to lead a quiet life - I really haven't got the mental strength to do battle at the moment. I find it really saps my energy having to deal with debt collectors and credit card companies. Anyhow, you'll be pleased to know, that for now I appear to have sorted DLC out, I am continuing paying the regular amount and I have gathered the names of all the twits I have been dealing with there and I have said that for now, I'm not reporting them to various places, but if they play up again I will do. They have "thanked" me for this and have apologised for their behaviour. But I am ready to have another go if needed - because I suspect my peace won't last long. But they are the pits - I really don't know where they get the people they employ - they lack sense, empathy, compassion and intelligence. But they are all seem the same - awful! You would have thought that with the state of the country at the moment they could get some top people to work for them - I suppose they don't pay much though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...