Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes, Hotpoint UK has been a subsidiary of Whirlpool for over 20 years. And unlike some domestic goods manufacturers you can buy from them direct and I believe they employ their own service engineers, Is that your situation? You bought direct from Hotpoint and Hotpoint sent out their own engineer?
    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
  • 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
      • 160 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

Removing a Default


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5000 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

My husband has had a torrid time with 1st Credit over many years after they chased him for a debt they say he owes with the Halifax. He's never had any dealings with the Halifax and has told them he thinks they've got the wrong man. Didn't matter to them - they bullied him relentless until he got the Ombudsmand involved and they suddenly admitted "Hey, we got no paperwork so we're dropping the matter".

Recently, my husband applied for an overdraft and was refused, the bank say it's because of a default against his name issued by 1st Credit. It says 2006 on his current report but he got a copy of his credit report in 2008 and it didn't show up then so can it be applied with a date in the past?

Anyway, this has the capacity to financially ruin us. We probably won't get the mortgage we need or a business loan. Can I get it removed? It seems like extortion to me. 1st Credit basically say "we don't care if we've got the wrong person, pay us £1500 or we'll financially ruin you". I want it gone - quick. Would we have a case for damages if we took it to Court?

If anyone knows what to do, it's you lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

I would immediiately write to 1st Credit, demanding the removal of the incorrect and unlawful information along with suitable compensation for marking your credit file with incorrect info AND without your permission.

 

Failure to do so within, say, 7 or 14 days will result in a court claim against them

 

Write to the CRA as well informing them of the incorrect info and remind them that they are jointly liable for any unlawful activity on the account

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

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

My humble opinion is that it would hurt to include in the letter to 1st Credit that you know they are under scrutiny of the Office of Fair Trading:

 

see

OFT imposes requirements on 1st Credit over debt collection practices - The Office of Fair Trading

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice guys. We have sent a letter to 1st Credit today via recorded delivery. We've asked them to remove the default within 10 days and we won't take further action. We've told them they must reply, inofrming us of their decision and, if they won't remove the default, we want details as to why. As a footnote to my letter, I wrote:-

"I notice that the OFT issued 1st Credit with a severe reprimand in February 2009 for improper practices. 1st Credit, in response to this, vowed to improve their business practices and respond to customer complaints. I do hope that this was not just an empty gesture. I look forward to receiving your response in timely fashion".

 

 

Fingers crossed that this will do the trick. Otherwise, we'll not let it rest until we sort it out.

Will post an update.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would advice you to also write to the CRA as well. Here is the guidance provided by the IOC and Experian has it actually posted on their website!

 

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/detailed_specialist_guides/default_tgn_version_v3%20%20doc.pdf

 

Look at sections 40 and 41, especially 41. If you query the information, they have to write to the “creditor” and ask then to substantiate it. The “creditor” then has 28 days to do that otherwise they have to remove the entry.

 

Doubt that 1st Credit will respond and it will take then 28 days but you will have to “encourage” the CRA’s to remove it. They are known for their reluctance to comply.

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding whether you have a case against them, certainly and the Case Law been used by everyone is:

 

Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society-199-1

 

Here is one place where you can find it:

 

39_Kpohraror_v_Woolw - Penalty A

 

If you do a search about this case, you will find tons of references to it! Quote this in a any correspondence, should you have to write to 1st Credit again.

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

WE HAVE SUCCESS.

1st Credit replied to me today stating that they have removed the default against my husbands name. But (and this is the sticking point) they say that they have "opened an investigation" into the origin of the debt and they reserve the right to reinstate the default should it be necessary.

I have now opened a case with the Ombudsman as this is totally out of order to leave it hanging over us like this. They said the debt refers to a Bank Account but can't tell us when it was opened or anything else about it. On some letters, they've spelt my husbands name wrong so they could easily have the wrong man.

I'll not be happy until they send us written confirmation that they will go away and never bother us again. The woman at the FOS was very positive that we have a good case for that.

I also notice that the CSA (who i'm complaining to about 1st Credit) calls CAG their "nemesis" - how cool is that? You annoy them that much. Every time I use CAG I will donate money to it so I can do my bit to make sure you carry on getting on the nerves of the entire credit industry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is good news!!!

 

Just for info:

 

When you make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman, they will charge them (1st Credit in this case) a minimum of £500 for investigating it, no matter what the outcome. Suits them well!!

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep checking your credit files, they have the habit of sneaking it back in, sometimes they think people are using the month free trial and will stop checking after a month. It is good that you keep the heat up! Getting an admittance and as much evidence against them is for your own protection.

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the information on the credit file is incorrect then both the CRA and the Originator are in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

It is clear from the IOC guidelines, link above, and there is case law for suing them, also alink above. Actually, they have both an obligation for ensuring that it is correct BEFORE displaying it and even if they remove it, you can still sue them because they have already caused damage! The CRA's do try to wash their hands but they are joined responsible!

 

They have to remove it but they try all kinds of tricks to avoid it, just be firm and persistent. Keeping it on after they have been informed that it is incorrect just make them digging their grave deeper.

“We believe Capital One Law takes privilege over UK Law” – Sven Lagerberg – Capital One.

-----------------

By supplying ALL the documents WILL NOT answer your questions but by supplying a SELECTIVE few will. – Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Separate requests with a fee should be made to ALL relevant Data Controllers in an organisation. - Jayne Sheenan – HSBC

------------------

Our t&c's overrides ICO guidelines when reporting to CRA's - Karon A Bullock - Capital One

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...