Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • America is a republic, (and) not a democracy - not quite there yet   Trump is a corrupt felon, not a president - yep
    • Hello I hope someone can give me some advice here, as I am at a bit of a loss on how to proceed. This relates to alleged offences under the RTA. Yesterday I received a notification from the local police of intention to prosecute for the following offences: 1 driving without due care and attention 2 failing to stop at a road traffic accident 3 failing to report a road traffic accident At this stage they have only asked me to say whether I was the driver at the time or not and provided a blank sheet of paper to give information about the incident. Going by the location (just round the corner from where I live) I can only imagine this relating to one recent incident, which wasn't actually an accident but more of a road rage event. I was driving past someone unloading or working next to his lorry which had stopped in the road. I wasn't going fast or anything, while I went by lorry man turned around and punched and kicked my car whilst going past him. I stopped and got out and wanted to know what he thought he was doing punching and kicking my car. He then hurled some verbal abuse at me, swearing and he was quite aggressive. I still didn't know what his problem was and said I would report him to his company for threatening behaviour and vandalism for punching my car. I got my phone and tried to take a photo of his lorry and number plate but at that moment he came right at me, still shouting and swearing, so I was worried he may hit me next, as he already punched my car. I thought if the guy hits me I will come off second best, so I decided to retreat. I quickly got back into my car and left. When I checked my phone later the photo I tried to take was blurred and useless, so I thought it was pointless to report the incident to the police, as the guy would not be traceable. Over that I forgot about it until I got the letter yesterday in the post. This is the only thing I believe this can relate to, but I have no idea based on what the three above allegations come from There was no road traffic accident, more of a road rage incident. So I am at a loss what to do. I have 28 days to respond. Should I just say yes I was the driver and was there and see what happens next, or should I already make a written statement on the attached piece of paper they sent me and send that with it ? Is there anyone here who would have a rough idea what to do next ? I tried my legal advice line through my Union, but they have sent me from pillar to post, now say it needs to go to a different department again and that would be chargeable as the RTA comes under Criminal Law. So any advice would be appreciated Many Thanks
    • So a quick update got bounced around two different departments and managed to speak to a DVLA bod , explained the situation and they could see the overlap and that DD payments had been made from Feb , also no formal remiders prior , they gave me a number for the legal dept who I am calling this morning to see what they can do in terms of the SJP notice , still have time to submit this online.  Will update after my chat this morning 
    • filed the defence at same time as suggested @dx100uk
    • Also, I am trying to understand how invoicing a large sum in a 6m period becomes tax fraud?   Is it because if he had invoiced over the £85k threshold he should have been obligated to charge vat?  Which would have meant hmrc would have benefited from the vat amount? So by not charging it Hmrc have lost out on £s revenue?  Is that what makes it tax fraud? So as a self-employed contractor, let's say he invoiced one Co for 200k.  Should he have charged vat on the full 200k (£40k)? Or just on the sum above the threshold (£23k)?  And that by not charging vat, he has knowingly withheld tax £s from Hmrc? And is the payer complicit ?
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Urgent help wanted. Capquest


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5157 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...