Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi, I am a local authority tenant and was in a 3 bed house. At the end of last year, my last child moved out and so did my spouse as we are now going through a divorce which meant that I was in the house alone and decided that I needed to downsize not only for myself but to offer the property to a family that needed it. I registered on the local authority housing bidding site as i was asked to do and I was accepted and given a priority banding as I was downsizing and they were desperate for my house. I have been extremely lucky and after about 6 weeks was accepted for a new build from a housing association via the housing gateway. I viewed the property 2 weeks ago and had to sign the tenancy last week when they were doing bulk signups for the houses and that is the day I moved. In between viewing and sign up, I contacted my current local authority landlord and asked how I give notice as I had been accepted for a property I had bid on and was moving.  The lady told me how to do it online and then said that I needed to give a full weeks notice which wasnt a problem as I had enough time.  (I was also told a weeks notice was what i would need to give by another staff member about a month ago when I phoned up for another housing related question.  I dont have any of this in writing.) I have now moved, handed back the keys and I am now being told that I need to give 4 weeks notice which I cannot afford. I hav e spoken to the council again explaining that I was told a week and that to be honest, if I knew they were going to charge me 4 weeks I would not have been able to move and would have stayed in the other house.  I thought I was doing the right thing. They said that calls are recorded and they asked me when I called in and was told a week and they would listen to the telephone conversation and if it was correct what I was told, they would see what they could do to reduce the notice period. They have now emailed me back and said that they have listened to the conversation and the lady said 4 weeks notice and I am liable for 4 weeks rent.  Now I may well of misheard her when I thought she said a full weeks notice she may have said 4 weeks notice but I am sure she said a full weeks notice and i was told a week by another member of staff a few weeks ago. I have emailed her back and said that I may of misheard but I would like to listen to the phone recording myself.  As yet they havent responded. I think its unreasonable for them to make me give 4 weeks when I had to sign the new tenancy with little notice or loose the property.  And it was all done through their gateway, and they will have a tenant in there pretty much straight away getting rent from them. I am on a very low income, I am on my own, I have serious medical issues and I am really getting myself stressed out over this. Any advice would be so appreciated.  Can I insist they let me listed to the recording? RH  
    • Susan Crichton is at the Inquiry today. She seems to have trouble remembering a lot of things but seems to find it easier if it's something that shows her in a good light.
    • Send them a letter of claim straightaway. No point hanging around. Given 14 days in the letter of claim and if they haven't paid you by then, issue the claim on day 15. The amount of time is more than adequate for them to get going. Post your draft letter of claim here. A look at. Then log onto the MoneyClaim website and start preparing your claim and post your particulars of claim here for us to have a look at. Don't bluff. No point in it.
    • That's what we thought, but the store manager is inferring that, as the jeweller we used was not a member of the NJA, no one  would give what he said, any credence. The Jeweller we used is in fact, a long established, well respected company, with 2 store and rather than just being a retailer, they craft the most exquisite jewellery inhouse!  I wish my Fiancé would have bought from them rather than H Samuel! Do you think we do need to get another report from and NJA accredited Jeweller ?
    • Really pleased that you won. UKPC know that you have supremacy of contract but still they persist because so many motorists blindly pay them.   Muppets.
  • 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

Sick Of Being Ignored!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5133 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

Hi All,

 

Despite notifying several parasitic Debt Collectors (lowell, Cabot, Capquest, McKenzie Hall etc.), that my debts are statute barred and they have zero chance of getting any of my money, they continue to ignore my claims and carry on as if I had never wrote to them.

 

What's the story with this then?

 

I've even had Cabot sending me an account statement!

 

I absolutely and positively know that any debts I had are Statute Barred, there is no question of having paid any of them or contacted any of them within the last 6 years.

 

Yet they continue to send me the biggest load of nonsense, account statements and the like, surely this is some kind of tactic?

 

I sent them a Statutory Notice to inform them about processing my data etc. and, guess what? they ignored that as well.

 

They, apparently, are legally entitled to do so because of the credit agreement that I signed (this does not exist by the way I asked for a copy etc. and never got anything).

 

Should I just bin their letters and forget about it or go through the endless drudgery of writing letters only to be ignored again?

 

If a debt is Statute Barred what can they do about it in reality?

 

Thanks!

 

RI

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Normal DCA tatics they all ignore ..total waste of paper ink and postage..Dont bin any letters just file under ignore..Unless they send you a SD(stat Demand) or a summons dont do anything..just put ya feet up ..If you get either of the 2 through the letter box then come back on here and the pro,s will guide you through the process :)

 

And if debt stat bard they know they cant do nothing ..But it doesnt stop them from trying

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or you could get a copy of your CRA File this will only cost £2 via post once you have it scan and print of copies and sent to the DCA's with a *uck off letter.

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried my local Trading Standards but the person assigned to me was quite pathetic and gave me the impression that she was on the bank's side!

 

I told her to forget it.

 

How on earth can they send a Stat Demand to anyone if the debt is Statute Barred and/or there is no CCA?

 

Would they actually be so pedantic?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that after the 6years (5 in Scotland) they cannot chase you for the debt, however, the debt still 'exists'.

 

Personally I would report each and every one of them to the OFT and Tradings Standards.

 

If it were me I would send one more letter for each account :

 

I do not acknowledge any debt to you or any other company or organisation that you claim to be representing.

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Account No:

 

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

 

I/we would point out that under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 "an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued".

 

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period".

 

The last acknowledgement or payment of this debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time.

 

Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me/us in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I/we suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me/us to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that "continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970".

 

I/we await your written confirmation that no further contact will be made concerning the above account and confirmation that this matter is now closed.

 

I/we look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that after the 6years (5 in Scotland) they cannot chase you for the debt, however, the debt still 'exists'.

 

Personally I would report each and every one of them to the OFT and Tradings Standards.

 

If it were me I would send one more letter for each account :

 

I do not acknowledge any debt to you or any other company or organisation that you claim to be representing.

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Account No:

 

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

 

I/we would point out that under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 "an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued".

 

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period".

 

The last acknowledgement or payment of this debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time.

 

Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me/us in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I/we suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me/us to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that "continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970".

 

I/we await your written confirmation that no further contact will be made concerning the above account and confirmation that this matter is now closed.

 

I/we look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

 

I've sent this to all of them but they simply disregard it and keep sending me stupid letters!

 

That's what I mean by 'ignored'.

 

More importantly, they are using the CRA'S as a weapon in their relentless hounding!

 

Thanks for the input!

 

RI

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is what they are doing only causes the opposite effect in that the more they hound you the more you will fight.

Finally if you succeed with your claim please consider a donation to consumer action group as those donations keep this site alive.

 R.I.P BOB aka ROOSTER-UK you have always been a Gent on these boards and you will be remembered for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that after the 6years (5 in Scotland) they cannot chase you for the debt, however, the debt still 'exists'.

 

 

That's a small, but significant error in the sense that they can still 'ask' you to pay the debt, assuming the debt is actually yours to pay.

 

They have to be 100% sure that you are who they think you are (i.e the debtor) before they 'ask' - they are not permitted to offer/threaten a court resolution to the matter - and all collection activity must cease once they have been informed and are aware that you will not/can not pay and the debt is statute barred.

 

If they continue to call and/or write, you should keep records and report them. They will say it's an 'administrative oversight' or a 'computer generated letter', or something along those lines, but as the recent British Gas case established, they can not use that as a defence to the fact they are unlawfully pursuing you. A formal complaint will go a long way toward to laying the foundation for a counter-claim, should it become possible.

 

:)

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It always is in the back of my mind that they could 'fabricate' details to make the debt 'live' again.

 

I'm sure it has been done before plenty!

 

After my incident with the forged signature on the dodgy Capital 1 CCA I've been very paranoid about these b*****ds and their tactics.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/249811-signature-tampering.html

 

RI

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correction about Scotland - under the Prescriptions and Limitations Act the debt does cease to exist altogether after 5 years.

 

So what if you lived in Scotland when you 'aquired' the debt and moved to say, England for example and it became Statute Barred then?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the more you write back to these leechers the more markers they put on your files that a mug awaits.

 

you are causing yourself the grief by sending anything.

 

you are on a phishing list.....simple.

 

it matters not you send XXX letter saying its statute barred, the leech that has you on their list is NEVER going to fwd that info on as it makes the list worthless

 

ignore them.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ignore them.

 

dx

 

The bottom line.......and by far the most effective method to get a debt problem resolved. :)

 

If they can take you to court, they will, but even then you'll probably come out of it better off.

 

It's statute barred.

 

Ignore them.

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...