Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Which Court have you received the claim from?  CIVIL NATIONAL BUSINESS CENTRE, NORTHAMPTON Name of the Claimant?  LOWELL PORTFOLIO LTD How many defendant's joint or self?  SELF Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  03 MAY 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  THE CLAIM IS FOR THE SUM OF £6000 DUE TO THE DEFENDANT UNDER AN AGREEMENT REGULATED BY THE CONSUMER ACT 1974 FOR A LLOYDS BANKING GROUP PLC ACCOUNT WITH AN ACCOUNT REFERENCE OF (ACCOUNT NO. 16 DIGITS LONG). THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO MAINTAIN CONTRACTUAL PAYMENTS REQUIRED BY THE AGREEMENT AND A DEFAULT NOTICE WAS SERVED UNDER S.87(1) OF THE CONSUMER ACT 1974 WHICH HAS NOT BEEN COMPLIED WITH. THE DEBT WAS LEGALLY ASSIGNED TO THE CLAIMANT ON (DATE) NOVEEMBER 2016 NOTICE OF WHICH HAS BEEN GIVEN TO THE DEFENDANT. THE CLAIM INCLUDES STATUORY INTEREST UNDER S.69 OF THE COUNTY COURTS ACT 1984 AT A RATE OF 8% PER ANNUM FOR THE DATE PF ASSIGNMENT TO THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS IN THE SUMBE OF £0.00. THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS THE SUM OF £6000. What is the total value of the claim? £6500 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? YES, NOTICES OF CLAIM.  Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  YES  Did you inform the claimant of your change of address?  NO Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account?  CREDIT CARD When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007?  BEFORE   Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post?  I DONT RECALL   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ?  NO   Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.  DEBT PURCHASER.   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? THE FIRST I RECALL WAS A LETTER FROM LOWELL SAYING THEY NOW OWNED THE DEBT.  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  NOT THAT I RECALL OR BEEN PROVIDED WITH THROUGH CCA REQUESTS.AT LAST REQUEST THEY SAID THEY WERE AWAITING THE DEFAULT NOTICE AND NO ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN UNTIL RESPONDED WHICH TO DATE I'VE NOT HAD OR SEEN.  Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  NO, I RECEIEVED LETTERS OF CLAIMS   Why did you cease payments?  I WAS UNDER MEDICAL CARE WHICH CAUSED ME NOT TO WORK. AROUND THAT TIME LOWELL HAD WANTED ME TO INCREASE MY PAYMENTS AS IT WOULD TAKE TOO LONG TO CLEAR THE DEBT. I HAD BEEN PAYING THEM WHAT I WAS PAYING THE BANK. I EXPLAINED MY THEN HEALTH & FINANCIAL POSITION AND THAT I WAS UNABLE TO DO SO. THEY PUT A HOLD ON MY ACCOUNT FOR A FEW MONTHS SO I CANCELLED MY DIRECT DEBIT. I MADE A FULL AND FINAL OFFER WHICH WAS REJECTED. WHEN THEY WANTED PAYMENTS TO RESUME I EXPLAINED I WAS IN A WORSE FINANCIAL POSITION, STILL UNDERTAKING TREATMENT AND NOW UNEMPLOYED SO COULD NOT START PAYMENTS AS THEY WANTED. AFTER SENDING MY FINANCIAL SPREADSHEET THEY KEPT SENDING LETTERS ASKING WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO. I COULDN’T SEE A WAY FORWARD I FELT STREESSED AND UNDER PRESSURE SO WROTE THAT I WOULD NOT BE CORRESPONDING WITH THEM ANYMORE.    What was the date of your last payment? NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2018   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? NO   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? I COMMUNICATED MY FINANCIAL PROBLEMS WITH THE CREDIT CARD COMPANY, WE MADE A MONTHLY PAYMENT AGREEMENT WHICH WAS KEPT FOR SEVERAL YEARS UNTIL DEBT WAS SOLD.  
    • Perhaps you would care to read this and reflect on your continuing comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany Jugg    ALEX BRUMMER: How grotesque of pro-Palestine protesters to besmirch Auschwitz, the place where my grandparents died WWW.DAILYMAIL.CO.UK As the son of a refugee from the horrors of the Holocaust, I can feel nothing but contempt for the ignorance, gross... My elderly aunt Sussie and cousin Sheindy had been teenagers at Auschwitz and Belsen but survived and are alive to this day. What they will make of the protesters who waved flags, heckled and chanted as Israelis took part in the March Of The Living – the annual walk from Auschwitz to Birkenau – I cannot imagine. The images now circulating of the protesters are indescribably disturbing. They can only bring back memories of those final moments Sheindy shared with my grandparents when my grandmother Fanya squeezed her hand and told her to lie about her age to avoid the gas chambers. Claiming she was older, and could work, meant that Sheindy lived, not died. The outrage perpetrated by Hamas on October 7 has brought back the most terrifying memories for these two women – memories of pillage, mutilation and starvation. The Holocaust, or Shoah to use the Hebrew word, was the deliberate, industrial-scale killing of Jews.  It is bad enough that pro-Palestinian and pro-Hamas sympathisers have chosen to steal the language of the Holocaust.  Any comparison between Israel's retaliation and the monstrous genocide of the 1940s is odious and anti-Semitic
    • Thank you JK2054 and BankFodder for your replies. The information requested is as follows:   My wife and I are sole traders supplying bespoke, handmade wedding trays and other items through our website. We do not sell on ebay. We had an order for two trays (invoice value £370) that were shipped on Monday 25th March. We used P2G as the broker and Evri as the shipper. We declared the value but did not take out insurance. As the trays were a present for a wedding on Saturday 30th March we checked the progress of delivery on the Thursday to see that there had been an attempt to deliver on the 27th but the driver failed to deliver as the customer’s gate was shut (customer informs us that the gates are open between 7am-7pm. We contacted the customer who informed us she had been waiting in all week and there had been no attempt of a delivery. Evri allege they attempted to deliver on the 28th & 29th. On the P2G web site on the 4th April at 14.17 it stated that the customer refused delivery. At 14.28 it updated to say there was a problem with the address and at 14.32 updated to say the customer had refused delivery. At 14.35 updated again to say it was being returned. Last entry was on the 7th April that it was being processed at the depot. We never received it. I have had six web chats with P2G between the 4th-30th April. On the 26th April, I had an offer of £20 plus cost of delivery (£6.72) from P2G which I rejected. During this time, I also contacted Evri that resulted in an email from Evri Customer Services (20th April) stating that they had lost the parcel. I replied requesting details of the attempted delivery but received no reply. After emailing Evri again on the 23rd asking again for the information I received a phone call from someone called Haleemah on the 25th who apologised and promised to send an email with a link to submit a claim form. I subsequently received an email with the link which only took me to a page that stated “Page not found”. After informing Evri customer services of the problem (to which no reply was forthcoming) a couple of days later I retried the link but it only took me to the Evri website. I believe that I have a good case against both companies but would appreciate guidance on which path to go down. I have read most of the information on this site, which has been very helpful and much appreciated, particularly the various court transcripts. I appreciate that this process is a marathon and not a sprint and am fully aware that I need to get everything in the correct order before starting on the legal road. I am sure this covers the current position but if further info is needed please let me know.  
    • Everything at small claims revolves around informality and common sense, there are no "special" ways to have to do things. The site manager's WS will be like yours and the one I linked to - just much shorter.  There need to be the introductory hearings about the case, the parties, etc., and the concluding Statement of Truth. In the middle just a couple of paragraphs where they say who they are, how they know you, and about permission being given by the landowner to use the car park. Superb.  I've added another section about the signage to the suggested WS sections three posts above. Yes, it's perfectly possible.  It'd be a good idea to phone the court on the 18th to see if they have paid.
    • OK thank you very much. I will prepare my WS as you advise.  I will indeed be preparing the WS over the weekend. I will also post UKPC's on Wednesday by 2nd class mail. As they have until the 17th to pay the court fee, is it possible they might discontinue at that stage too? Also I wanted to ask, in what form should the site manager's statement come? And the site owner if i can contact them? I will get photos of the signage to share with you also. Thank you.
  • 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

HFO Services/Capital/Turnbull barclaycard debt


vjohn82
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4774 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

If I may ask so that I can understand when a debtor having received a faulty DN

could accept (notify) the creditors breach of contract:

1) without needing to wait for anything in writing from the creditor whether or not specifically stating that the creditor had terminated?

2) or only on a receipt in writing specifically stating that the contract is now terminated?

3) or merely on a demand for the full balance of the contract, whether from the OC or a DCA?

4) or without the necessity of any of the above?

 

thx

 

In contract law, technically, them sending you a faulty default notice is not grounds enough to state a breach of contract, even if the figures are wrong or the format is wrong, etc... in CCA it would be a breach.

 

In contract law that would be a rescission for inadequate reason by the debtor but if the creditor later requests full amount on the back of the faulty DN, then as they have not complied with statute, they can't ask for it and them asking for the full amount is equivalent to repudiation of a term because this term is that you will pay in monthly instalments x amount.

 

Also, by them terminating the agreement on the back of a faulty DN, they are again repudiating the contract and are only entitled to arrears and not the full amount as statute has stated that for them to recoup the full amount, the process must be followed.

 

There is an uneasy compromise between CCA and contract law when we investigate the topic of a faulty DN.

 

It is always IMO to avoid getting into the contract law part of it as you are then liable at least for the arrears on the back of the faulty DN whilst using CCA, you are potentially not liable for anything. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

In contract law, technically, them sending you a faulty default notice is not grounds enough to state a breach of contract, even if the figures are wrong or the format is wrong, etc... in CCA it would be a breach.

As we are discussing agreements governed by CCA then would I be correct by saying that CCA statute takes precedence over Contract Law.

I imagine it must other wise CCA would be obsolete in terms of what you've said here?

 

In contract law that would be a rescission for inadequate reason by the debtor but if the creditor later requests full amount on the back of the faulty DN, then as they have not complied with statute, they can't ask for it and them asking for the full amount is equivalent to repudiation of a term because this term is that you will pay in monthly instalments x amount.

So one would need to wait for point (3) of my list and again the

"terms" falling under the regulations within the CCA take precedence over contract law ?

Also, by them terminating the agreement on the back of a faulty DN, they are again repudiating the contract and are only entitled to arrears and not the full amount as statute has stated that for them to recoup the full amount, the process must be followed.

I take it you mean that the creditor has confirmed the termination in writing?

which would be point (2) on my list.

 

There is an uneasy compromise between CCA and contract law when we investigate the topic of a faulty DN.

 

It is always IMO to avoid getting into the contract law part of it as you are then liable at least for the arrears on the back of the faulty DN whilst using CCA, you are potentially not liable for anything. :)

This seems a contradiction. Is it not the CCA that stipulates only the arrears are due if a faulty DN has been issued?

How does using CCA potentially make a debtor not liable for anything?

Or are you referring to when there has not been a DN served prior to demand of full balance?

 

Many thx.

 

PS: I've just realized (1) and (4) are the same..

So it's down to 2 out of the 3 on my list..lol

Edited by mot22
Link to post
Share on other sites

As we are discussing agreements governed by CCA then would I be correct by saying that CCA statute takes precedence over Contract Law.

I imagine it must other wise CCA would be obsolete in terms of what you've said here?

 

Statute always overrules case law which is what contract law has developed from but CCA does not cover every eventuality. :) Also, in CCA, a DN gives protection to the debtor as regards a creditor terminating the agreement if the debtor repudiates the contract by not paying. CCA has contract law elements in there and is geared to have certain processes in place to protect the debtor if certain events occur.

So one would need to wait for point (3) of my list and again the

"terms" falling under the regulations within the CCA take precedence over contract law ?

I take it you mean that the creditor has confirmed the termination in writing?

which would be point (2) on my list.

 

This seems a contradiction. Is it not the CCA that stipulates only the arrears are due if a faulty DN has been issued?

 

You are wise young Jedi :) but when a case goes to Court, the arrears are not claimed, the full outstanding amount is so that is not allowed without a compliant DN and due to that, they can't get judgement. DCAs never go for arrears, even when they know they have a faulty DN.

 

How does using CCA potentially make a debtor not liable for anything?

 

As above... technically, the debtor is liable for arrears, just like in contract law... but no one ever claims arrears only. They claim the full balance on the back of a DN.

 

Or are you referring to when there has not been a DN served prior to demand of full balance?

A DN is not required to demand arrears... it is done so the DCA can terminate the agreement or demand the full balance. That is why the points above are about faulty DNs... if the DCA just wanted arrears, they would take you to Court (see next para) just for the arrears without a DN. By issuing the DN, they want the full balance and hence why in the claim, there is the full balance.

 

Particular regard must be paid to the intention of the DCA by use of notices... by issuing a (faulty) DN, the DCA has the intention of claiming the full balance, but in contract law and CCA, they can only claim arrears BUT in Court, they claim for everything which is why the debtor is not liable until they fix their act up. :)

Many thx.

 

PS: I've just realized (1) and (4) are the same..

So it's down to 2 out of the 3 on my list..lol

Apologies if I repeated myself and rambled on... it's late.

 

Ps. It can be argued that the DCAs are precluded from getting a money judgement as a result of their faulty DN. That is a discussion for another time...

Edited by rhodium78
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies if I repeated myself and rambled on... it's late.

Please, no need, as you said, the hour was late...I'm appreciative for your thoughts. Besides as I am neither "wise" nor a "Jedi", it is I that should apologise for my inexperience. Indeed I am in need of one of those coloured fluorescent light bulb "thingies". Not to duel with although it might come in handy one day but rather to illuminate. As your user name suggests, what you say may be more valuable than gold! So thx..

 

If I am understanding this then the CCA not merely protects the debtor from the creditor but more specifically that the debtor is protector from the rights a creditor has under Contract Law?

I'm thinking out load so apologies if this is all nonsense.

In relation to the acceptance of the creditors breach, it seems that a debtor must first be proficient enough in Contract Law to have been aware and understood to have accepted that the creditor had indeed breached the terms of the CCA.

If not then that ability to accept the creditors breach would be lost and the contract is deemed to endure.

In that regard CCA does not seem to protect the debtor from the rights that Contract Law affords the creditor which seems to be a contradiction?

Having said that and specific to a debtors acceptance (or not) of a creditors breach, when you say...

but when a case goes to Court, the arrears are not claimed, the full outstanding amount is so that is not allowed without a compliant DN and due to that, they can't get judgement.

...then which takes precedence (if that's an appropriate term)? The protection of the CCA for the debtor by virtue of a non compliant DN, or the protection of Contract Law for the creditor by virtue of the debtor having not accepted the creditors breach due to his ignorance of Contract Law?

If CCA truly protects the debtor then would not the endurance of the contract the creditor is arguing for become irrelevant?

 

Lastly, I have seen many posts elsewhere alluding to the ignorance of OC's by their issuance of faulty DN's. I was not so convinced and what you have said regards their objectives is interesting. In other words, for the debtor it is (hopefully) about the Law, for the OC it's a numbers game.

 

Ps. It can be argued that the DCAs are precluded from getting a money judgement as a result of their faulty DN. That is a discussion for another time...

Further enlightenment is always welcome..

Apologies to the OP if this is all an intrusion or off topic..

Many thx..

Edited by mot22
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You flatter me Good Sir... but it is undeserved. :)

 

If I am understanding this then the CCA not merely protects the debtor from the creditor but more specifically that the debtor is protector from the rights a creditor has under Contract Law?

 

More like the CCA is protector of the rights a debtor has under Contract law. To be honest, you can't see them as oil and water... they both work with each other and CCA implements certain "standards" which were present in contract law such as DNs, etc.

 

I'm thinking out load so apologies if this is all nonsense.

In relation to the acceptance of the creditors breach, it seems that a debtor must first be proficient enough in Contract Law to have been aware and understood to have accepted that the creditor had indeed breached the terms of the CCA.

If not then that ability to accept the creditors breach would be lost and the contract is deemed to endure.

In that regard CCA does not seem to protect the debtor from the rights that Contract Law affords the creditor which seems to be a contradiction?

 

The debtor because of the actions of the creditor must unfortunately be proficient in CCA and basic contract law but my understanding of CCA and the thinking behind it is that the bill draftsmen of CCA had an inkling of faith in the creditors in the context that if they were going to use a DN, then it must follow certain format and which is why the format is clearly illustrated so as not to make any mistakes. My hypothesis and it is only a hypothesis in to their mindset, is that it was assumed by the bill draftsmen that the creditors will adhere to the protocol set out in the Regs and Act and that if not, the Judicial system will uphold it. Unfortunately as we know, that is not true and which is why the debtor in my opinion should be conversant with the CCA and the basics of contract law.

 

In contract law, the use of a DN is not new at all. DNs were issued for a breach of a term... that was incorporated into CCA and there are multiple instances of shipping, freight, etc. contracts where a "faulty DN" in the context of a contract was deemed to only entitle the sender of the DN to arrears but then we have something called "special damages" which further complicates matters and depending on the term breached, etc., might allow the sender of the DN for the full amount requested.

 

 

Having said that and specific to a debtors acceptance (or not) of a creditors breach, when you say...

...then which takes precedence (if that's an appropriate term)? The protection of the CCA for the debtor by virtue of a non compliant DN, or the protection of Contract Law for the creditor by virtue of the debtor having not accepted the creditors breach due to his ignorance of Contract Law?

If CCA truly protects the debtor then would not the endurance of the contract the creditor is arguing for become irrelevant?

 

I have to state that the last thing a LiP wants to do is start quoting contract law as it is not intuitive and has a lot of different facets and exceptions to it.

 

You are looking at contract law protecting the creditor, it doesn't. It protects both parties. :) Also, it is not either contract law or CCA... It is both. CCA ensures that the creditor has to jump certain hurdles to be entitled to taking action on the debtor's breach. Imagine a world without CCA :-|. In the contract there is no DN, no cooling off period, nothing lke that (similar to some very dodgy commercial loan agreements). So what happens is that you miss a payment or are late with it... the creditor can pull the facility. There are a few cases where in a commercial loan contract, the debtor (company) defaults on the payment, the lender sends the DN to the debtor as per the contract, and HOURS later pulls the facility and demands full payment. That was deemed to be fine in contract law. :shock:

 

I have not seen that argument yet by a DCA of the contact enduring despite their breach but all it takes is one clever dicky of a solicitor/barrister on their side to look at it holistically and think of ways of getting the debtor to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

 

I am at present involved in litigation and have only received a letter via CPR 31.14 showing/advising of an assignment from the OC to the Claimant (which was on their own letter headed paper) sent by a firm of solicitors (acting on behalf of the claimant) and not the OC or the Claimant.

 

It is also 4 digits short of my account number.

 

Is this classed as a legal notice of assignment which will suffice for the purpose of this claim even though the claim was started before I set eyes on this assignment?

 

Regards

 

Santos

Springfield

Link to post
Share on other sites

.........A DN is not required to demand arrears... it is done so the DCAlink3.gif can terminate the agreement or demand the full balance....By issuing the DN, they want the full balance and hence why in the claim, there is the full balance........

 

so, this then is consistent with s87 re 'to demand earlier payment of any sum'. the 'earlier payment' being the full balance?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all semantics I believe but earlier payment of any sum equates to the future instalments. They are already entitled to the unpaid arrears accrued under the agreement. The DN entitles them to future instalments as well so when they issue court proceedings, they are claiming the arrears and all the future instalments together.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all semantics I believe but earlier payment of any sum equates to the future instalments. They are already entitled to the unpaid arrears accrued under the agreement. The DN entitles them to future instalments as well so when they issue court proceedings, they are claiming the arrears and all the future instalments together.

 

i know what you mean re arrears. but was just clarifying that, as you say, the 'to demand earlier payment of any sum' includes for eg demanding the full balance (which of course includes any arrears).

Edited by Ford
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have said already... TR bank with Barclays (as does the entire Concillian Group I believe) so you can imagine the conversation that was had ;-)

 

Can't have a rogue CAGGER spoiling their little enterprise now can we?

 

However, the letters are still monumental cock ups because they introduce more questions than answers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

from 2006 to 2007

 

 

GRAHAM WHITE PO BOX 342 LAVENDER PARK ROAD WEST BYFLEET SURREY KT146NA 01932 332 032 0870 744 6240 fax

Roxburgh UK Ltd

PO Box 342

WEST BYFLEET

KT14 6YX

GRAHAM WHITE & CO 94 HIGH STREET BUSHEY HERTFORDSHIRE WD233HD 020 8950 2206 020 8950 0250 (fax)

Graham White Registered No UC5092048

PO Box 342 Lavender Pk Road West Byfleet Surrey KT14 6NA

ROXBURGHE INTERNATIONAL CREDIT SERVICES LIMITED

Registered No. 01330036

BEACON HOUSE, PYRFORD ROAD, WEST BYFLEET, SURREY, KT14 6LD

Roxburghe International Plc - Debt collection agency

Roxburghe (UK) Limited

ROXBURGHE (UK) LIMITED

Registered No. 03137269

KINGS PARADE, LOWER COOMBE STREET, CROYDON, SURREY, CR0 1AA

03/08/2004 DSG COLLECTIONS LIMITED

13/12/1999 ROXNET ONLINE LIMITED

08/03/1996 ROXNET ON LINE LIMITED

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think he would nt be too happy to find that some of his staff are auditing accounts from thin air....worth asking if he really approves of what is happenning and bearing in mind that he has been now made aware of what is happenning he should now consider himsef to being involved to vj asking for a forensic accountant to investigate the use of the NAMED COMPUTORS THEY ARE USING TO FIND THIS DATA isnt that right vj..they need to name the computor terminals where they found this evidence...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've already contacted John Varley but he was quite happy to allow Maureen Cooke to lie and fudge her way through a phone call. It seems they would rather deal with a bunch of pettifoggers than actually adhere to proper financial standards.

 

The coincidence of schedule 2 is the most surprising aspect of this... it's such a shoddy document it is untrue.

 

They will have a hard time explaining why a 6 month data protection act complaint did not yield it and a court case going on since July 2007 did not yield it.

 

What did you say Coffee-Smith? It just "appeared"???

 

Hilarious.

 

Oh and "might be due to computer constraints at the time"???

 

What? The computers keyboard did not have an F and a C so they had to type "ROXBURGHE" instead of "HFOCAPITAL"???

 

As I have said, I imagine that the BC systems work on a form of Access which I was programming with relative ease between 1999 and 2003 and understand both the limitations of the system and the benefits. It would never benefit a company to use Roxburghe (a company who HFO Services were called for 3 weeks) over and above the alleged LEGAL assignee HFO Capital.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...