Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I left Dubai 8 years ago and intended to return. However a job prospect fell through. I’d been there for 15 years. Anyway I decided to pay my credit card and the bank had frozen my account. There is no means to pay the CC so completely unable to pay when I wanted to other than the bank advising me to ask a friend in the UAE to pay it on my behalf!  fast forward bank informs there is a police case against me for non payment. Years later IDR chased me and after months/ years they stopped. Now Judge & Priestley are trying their luck. Now I have received an email in English and Arabic from JP saying the bank has authorised them to collect debts. Is this the same as IDR although I didn’t receive anything like this from them. Just says they are authorised?
    • The neighbour's house is built right on the boundary so the side of their house is effectively the 'wall' in our garden separating the two properties. It's a three storey house and so the mortar poses a potential danger to us. Because of the danger, we have put up an interior fence in our garden to ensure we don't risk mortar dropping on us. That reduces the garden by 25% which is not only an inconvenience, but it's the part of the garden where we had lined up contractors to install a patio and gazebo which we will use for our wedding reception in less than 2 months. We have spoken to the neighbour's caretaker who is on the case, has spoken with a roofer and possibly a scaffolding company, but there are several issues. They don't seem to understand the urgency. As long as there is a risk of falling mortar, we can't carry out any work in the garden, and unless they hurry up, we're looking at cancelling our wedding as it's not viable to book a venue because we can't use our own garden! Also, they want to put the scaffolding up in our garden which would be ok with us if it was a matter of a few days and they hurried up, but there is a tree (most likely protected by the conservation area), so most likely they can only reach part of the roof with the scaffolding if they put it up in our garden. We suggested a roofer with a cherry picker but they seem to want to use a company they've used before. Any and all comments, suggestions, advice is more than welcome.  PS. does it make any difference that the neighbour is a business (ltd) and not a private dwelling?
    • No apology needed, thank you for what you do I am glad to hear they paid. well done on getting back what is yours
    • Apologies all for the late reply and info, i have been away with the Army. They have paid I accepted the offer on the 5th of May, and they paid on the 17th of May.
  • 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

Urgent help wanted. Capquest


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5144 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

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Am I right in thinking you are counting 14 straight days. With a CCA request, they have 12 WORKING days (don't include weekends or bank holidays)to supply the agreement and the other 2 days are for delivery

 

By my calculation, their days are up next wednesday

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you know tomorrow will be 14 days since they received my letter. What i want to do is have another letter to send back to them tomorrow after I've checked the post. You've been a great help. My wife is still worried sick though. How do i proceed?

 

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afternoon :)

 

If you bookmark this link:

 

The Consumer Forums - Debt collectors

 

you will them have access to the normal letters to send to the pond life. I recommend letter 20

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok theres been a development. Today i had a letter from them saying they are in receipt of the CCA and statements. But they won't release them until i phone them. As you know their 14 working days to supply the aggreement was the 31th of March. The letter i got today was dated the 31st but the envelope was franked the 6th of April.

 

I've included a link to the letter below. What's the next step?

 

img004.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute rubbish. They've no doubt been happy to sent demands to you without 'data protection' issues. Keep that envelope. They are late and they know it.

 

Simply demand they send it forthwith, and complain to the OFT anyway - they have no right to do this. They are taking the pish and just trying to make you call them.

 

If you want to cause them trouble, you could call and record it and let them really drop themselves in it - ask which part of the act presents a problem and why - they must not mislead you.

 

EDIT: On reflection, I doubt they even actually have the documents...

Link to post
Share on other sites

My wifes on the edge of a nervous breakdown because of this and her father passing away. It's getting to me too. Don't seem to sleep very well now.

 

Does anyone know which part of the Data Protection Act they are refering to? How should i word the letter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's just rubbish. Simply write this:

 

Dear Tw*ts

 

In your letter of 31 March, received on 8 April in an envelope postmarked 6 April, you suggest that it is necessary that I contact you regarding important security information under the Data Protection Act in order that you can release documents to me.

 

This is a bare-faced lie. There is no requirement for me to contact you under the Data Protection Act. You have been happy to send scurrilous demands to my address on previous occasions without resort to the Data Protection Act, so you are clearly perfectly satisfied that my identity is known to you.

 

I have paid the statutory fee for these documents and I demand that you send them to me forthwith.

 

You will be aware that you have not supplied these documents to me within the required timescales. Take note that the account is therefore now officially in dispute.

 

I believe your attempt to force me to telephone you on spurious grounds is a serious breach of OFT guidelines and I shall be making a complaint about your letter and behaviour in this matter immediately.

 

I expect to receive these documents by return.

 

Yours etc

 

Peed Off

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's just rubbish. Simply write this:

 

Dear Tw*ts

 

In your letter of 31 March, received on 8 April in an envelope postmarked 6 April, you suggest that it is necessary that I contact you regarding important security information under the Data Protection Act in order that you can release documents to me.

 

This is a bare-faced lie. There is no requirement for me to contact you under the Data Protection Act. You have been happy to send scurrilous demands to my address on previous occasions without resort to the Data Protection Act, so you are clearly perfectly satisfied that my identity is known to you.

 

I have paid the statutory fee for these documents and I demand that you send them to me forthwith.

 

You will be aware that you have not supplied these documents to me within the required timescales. Take note that the account is therefore now officially in dispute.

 

I believe your attempt to force me to telephone you on spurious grounds is a serious breach of OFT guidelines and I shall be making a complaint about your letter and behaviour in this matter immediately.

 

I expect to receive these documents by return.

 

Yours etc

 

Peed Off

 

 

 

 

Excellent reply.... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Today I got another letter from Capquest with a Chargecard application form that that I supposedly filled out in 1997 that is bordering on illegible, (have a look at the data policy section). A statement of account with dates from 2007 (statement date 2010), relating to a Credit Card and a copy of the terms and conditions dated October 2009.

 

 

Anyway I've uploaded them all in a zip file. Have a peek and let me know what you think. What sould I do now?

 

 

 

I'd like to thank everyone who has helped so far. You have been a great support.

 

 

DOWNLOAD HERE

 

 

 

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another thing. From what date is a statute barred 6 year term calculated from? On the statement it quotes 2007 but i know for a fact that it was a long time before this that the account went into default with M&S.

 

Any ideas how i should proceed?

 

When this is all over I'm thinking of taking them to small claims to claim for the time, postage and stationary i have used. If they don't pay I'll send a bailiff in to collect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what they've sent you is a 'statement of transactions' which is no such thing? Clearly, they don't want to show when the last actual activity was on the account.

 

SB would start from, say, a month after you last made a payment, ie. when your next payment was due, and you missed it.

 

You need to either SAR M&S for the proper statements, or demand from C-r-apquest the proper statements of the history of the account - all they have supplied is the statutory statement they are required to by law.

 

At least you now know M&S probably have the info.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just sent them this. Do you think It'll work. They are breaking the law after all.

Account In Dispute

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for sending me some of the paperwork I requested. However I must point out that it is well after the prescribed 12 + 2 days, and the alleged debt is now unenforceable by law. However the information you have sent me has made some interesting reading, and I have discovered some serious, and downright illegal discrepancies in the documents received so far;

 

 

 

  1. Application Form (For Office Use Only Section).
    On this form it says nothing about the account being approved and is not stamped as approved. There is NO authorisation code in the relevant box, and it seems that no identification was presented or requested when the account was applied for, as none of the identification provided boxes are ticked. As you know anyone applying for any sort of financial service must provide proper, correct, and legal identification. Only the store number and sales assistant numbers are present, (presumably for commission purposes). There is NO account/reference number filled out in the relevant boxes. This indicates that the account was NOT opened with the information contained in this document. If an account was opened with this document then Marks & Spencer would have been breaking Financial Services Authority rules, and thus the law.
  2. Section 10A of the application form.
    In this section the following is filled in. It states “Complete only if you wish to apply for a charge card” This section is ticked, and the credit limit requested is £500. So as you can see this appears to be an application for a charge card only.
  3. Handwriting on the Application Form.
    The handwriting on the application bears no resemblance to my own whatsoever.
  4. Application form illegible.
    Certain sections of the application form are illegible, especially the smaller print sections such as the data protection section, and large sections of the original Terms and Conditions, from when the account was allegedly applied for in 1997.
  5. Copy of the terms and conditions.
    You have sent me a another copy of the terms and conditions, presumably because the original 1997 terms and conditions were illegible. However, these do not relate to this account whatsoever, as this document is date marked as October 2009. At least two years after the alleged debt was sold to yourselves. Also these terms and conditions appear to be for a credit card, as it mentions cash advances and balance transfers.
  6. Statement of Transactions.
    You have sent me a statement of transactions, which shows the date the alleged debt was transferred to yourselves. At the top of this document it states “Marks & Spencer Credit Card. NOT CHARGE CARD!.

 

 

As you are aware charge cards and credit cards are completely different and incompatible financial products requiring their own applications forms, processes and terms and conditions. I am somewhat confused how you can be chasing an alleged credit card debt, and supply an illegal unapproved application form for a charge card as proof of this alleged debt.

 

 

Please remove the alleged debt from my credit files and destroy all my details from your records. Please confirm this has been completed within 14 working days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...