Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have never heard of any such law. Please post a link to what you have read online that explains this law. And please confirm whether you were ever married to or in a formal Civil Partnership with your Ex.
    • Today has been hectic so  have been unable to complete the whole thing. If you now understand it and want to go ahead with a complaint to the IPC, fine. If not then I won't need to finish it. But below is my response to your request  on post 64. No you don't seem stupid, the Protection of Freedoms Act isn't easy to get one 's head around at first. The part of the above Act referring to private parking is contained within Schedule 4 which you can find online under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Section 9 of SCH.4 relates to how the parking scrotes have to perform so that they can transfer their right to pursue the keeper from the driver when the PCN is still unpaid after a certain amount of time. In your case the PCN was posted to you the keeper and arrived within 14 days from when they claimed a breach occurred. That means they complied with first part of the Act. The driver at that time was still responsible to pay the charge demanded on the PCN and PCM now have to wait for 28 days to elapse before they can write and advise the keeper that as the charge has not been paid, that they now have the right to pursue the keeper. They claim they sent the first PCN on the 13th March, five days after the alleged breach and it arrived on Friday 15th March. So to comply with the Act they have to observe Section 8 subsection 2f   (f)warn the keeper that if, after the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which the notice is given— (i)the amount of the unpaid parking charges specified under paragraph (d) has not been paid in full, and (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------So the first PCN was deemed to arrive on the 15th March and for 28 days to have elapsed is when the time is right for them to write and say you are now liable as keeper. So they sent the next PCN on the 12th April which is too early as you could still have paid until midnight of the 12th. So the earliest their second PCN should have gone to you was  Saturday 13th April so more likely on Monday 15th April. The IPC Code of Conduct states "Operators must be aware of their legal obligations and implement the relevant legislation and guidance when operating their businesses." So by issuing your demand a day early, they have broken the Act, the IPC Code of Conduct, the DVLA agreement  to abide by the law and the Code of Conduct not to mention a possible breach of your GDPR .   I asked the IPC  in the letter on an earlier to confirm that  CPMs Notice misrepresenting the law was a standard practice for all of PCMs Notices or just certain ones. Their distribution  may depend on when they were issued and whether they were issued in certain localities or for certain breaches. Whichever method used is a serious breach of the Law and could lead to PCM being black listed by the DVLA . One would expect that after that even if the IPC did not cancel your ticket, PCM could not risk going to Court with you nor even pursuing you any further.
    • thanks jk2054 - do you know any law i can quote (regarding timeframe) when sending the email as if i cant they'll probably just say no like the normal staff have done? thanks.
    • I lived there with her up until I gave notice. She took over the tenancy in her name. I had a letter from the council and a refund of the council tax for 1 month.    She took on the bills and tenancy and only paid the rent. No utility bills or council tax were paid once she took it over. She will continue to not pay bills in her new house which I'm now having to pay or will have to. I have looked online I believe the police and solicitors are going by the partner law to make me liable.   I have always paid my bills and ensured her half was paid then see how much free money is over.   She spends all her money on payday loans and rubbish then panics about the rent. I usually end up paying it or having to get her a loan.   Stupidly in my name but at the time it was because she was my partner. I even paid to move her and clean and decorate her old house so she got the deposit back. It cost me £3000 due to the mess she always leaves behind.
  • 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

S.R.J. Debt Recovery & SKY


ratbag1970
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5127 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 received a letter today from S.R.J Recoveries informing me that I owe SKY £60.00. I haven't had Sky tv since I canceled the contract at least 6 or 7 years ago, at my previous address, and to the best of my knowledge I owe them nothing.

I have had no correspondence from SKY or anyone representing them since then until today. I moved to my current address 2 years ago. I phoned them this afternoon and was informed this debt is from 2005!! I am not disputing I had an account with Sky, but I am not convinced I owe them anything.

If I did, a) I would have paid it when I canceled the contract or b) I would have paid them on the phone.

The nice (!) lady on the phone said I should write in informing them that I am disputing the amount owed. I'm not entirely sure how to word the letter. Also she informed me on the phone that they have had a lot of accounts in from SKY from 2005 and they have had a lot of calls from customers disputing the amounts owed. She also kindly mentioned that "Was it really worth incurring all the extra fees and costs for the sake of £60.00? It would be cheaper for me to just pay it over the phone now."

Some advice would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your responses. I must admit, the letter has got me asking myself do I actually owe the £60.00? Clearly I'm not about to hand it over without some kind of proof. As far as I can remember there has been nothing paid to SKY for at least 6 years, so I think I will send them the statute barred letter and see how it goes. And I completely agree about it being a nice little earner, if I had been less suspicious, I may have paid it!!! Depending on the response to the statue barred letter, I may well speak to trading standards. I have been nosing around regarding this company, and like a lot of them they don't seem to care about the legalities of debt collection. I thin the term "Bottom Feeders" was used in one particular post!

 

The only concern is that SRJ are saying that the debt is from 2005, which would only make the debt 5 years old not 6. The debt wouldn't be statute barred.

 

Many Thanks.

Edited by ratbag1970
Link to post
Share on other sites

Im just getting more curious here now, £60 is a nice round figure, almost as if you'd moved home and requested that they provide sky at a new address. For which they charge around £60, ( install phone and hook up).

maybe, it would be wise to enquire to sky about this. ( not over the phone you'll be there for 8 hours:D).

Just a thought

Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny you should say that, my daughter has just said she received a similar letter, only SRJ told her to ring SKY to query it and once she got through, they offered her a special SKY package!!!!!

Is there any possibility you can give me an idea who I should email/write to regarding SKY?

To be honest it's so long ago I have no paper-work regarding the account with SKY. There is nothing on my credit report relating to it either, I am 99% positive I don't owe them anything but it really has got me questioning it. I am also 99% certain it was at least 6 years ago not 5. Even though I canceled the contract with SKY, I had a SKY Freeview card and I'm positively sure if I had owed them anything they would have contacted me, repeatedly at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only concern is that SRJ are saying that the debt is from 2005, which would only make the debt 5 years old not 6. The debt wouldn't be statute barred.

 

 

The number 1 rule with debt collectors (After the one that says "Don't speak to them on the phone";)) is don't believe a word they say. Anything they haven't put in writing is probably a lie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The number 1 rule with debt collectors (After the one that says "Don't speak to them on the phone";)) is don't believe a word they say. Anything they haven't put in writing is probably a lie.

 

Ok, I was irritated. I never usually contact a DCA by phone. Letter already in the post, no signature!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't re-sign with SKY if they paid ME a monthly fee :D. Half the channels available on Freeview or Freesat SKY charge for!!!

TBH, if someone owed me money from years previously, I wouldn't lend them money or offer them a service without being paid first!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have just received a Trace confirmation letter from S R J.also regarding a so called debt from SKY from 2005,I did have sky and had for a few years, but moved in 2004 having cancelled the contract in the correct way so was suspicious.Since I received the original letter which just stated that a trace had been put on me.I will type what letter says, its easier that way.(We have failed to receive a response to previouss correspondence and have therefore made tracing enquires for confirmation of your current place of residence,information has been received confirming your address details have changed to this address.Please contact us immediately on 08453137203 qouting the above reference number.)(Big Brother or what!!) I changed my name legally in 2004 following a divorce and have moved from the original address they say the debt is from 3 times!!!I finished my account with sky more than 6 years ago and all monies owing on the account were payed.I asked S R J for details from sky about the so called debt and was told they did'nt have to give them to me,so I did some research online and found I am not the only one who is being harrassed by this company.Having done my research and received some advice I phoned them back and told them that I will not be paying the so called debt they had purchased from Sky and anyway as it was over 6 years old even though I was told last week it was passed to them in January 2005.I know I had moved from that address and my post was redirected anyway and I certainly had no correspondence from Sky.I told them I was photo copying there letter and giving copies of it to my local MP, the trading standards authority and the local police.I firmly believe these bottom feeders should be stopped at all cost as other people may just pay up,there are a lot of vunerable people out there.Does anyone thing this is the right way to deal with companies like this or is there another way? Would value feedback as I feel for all the people who may be unable to deal with such companies who seem to make the rules up to siut themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SRJ are hilarious:D

 

You can bait these cluless morons till the cows come home, i am extremely surprised they can even manage to organise a workforce, least of all continue sending out red headed fabricated debts.

 

Send copies of any drivel they send to the OFT and TS via Consumer Direct, to investigate.

 

I wouldn't pay them just out of principle, send them £60 in monopoly money...: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

Its companies like this that could easily send out about a thousand letters like this in a month asking for £60, if only one hundred pay up then it’s a nice earner

And when they are caught out they will simply put it down as a “Computer Error” or something.

If I did that and sent out letters to people claiming they owed money but they didn’t then I would be put in prison for obtaining money by deception.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thought I'd update the thread. I have received a response from SRJ in relation to the general debt letter of "No Knowledge" I sent them. The letter reads as follows dated the 19/03/10:

 

"We thank you for your recent communication and note the contents. We confirm that we are taking instructions from our client and will revert to you shortly. In the meantime, we have placed the account on hold. "

 

I can't wait for the next letter to arrive!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

They must of bought a job lot of old debts off Sky... got a letter today saying "pending litigation" "we've traced you"

 

It's for an old Sky bill of £35... now when I was moving over 6 years ago I called up and tried to cancel/give notice to Sky, but their computers were down and the guy I spoke to was very rude to me... I just cancelled my DD and disconnected the Skybox.

 

Now they have sent in these clowns to try and recover the money! they can Foxtrot Oscar for sure! :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Now that shows you how really sad and desperate these people are, attempting to get a CCJ for £35!:lol:

 

The DJ would laugh them out of 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...