Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Interesting question regarding what Government accounts opposition parties have access to, before an General Election. From what I understand, Government department accounts that are published are always lagging behind and would not include some amounts which are classified as 'commercially sensitive'.  Therefore opposition parties and Parliamentrary select committees would not have access to accounts which contain real time up to date information. If a new Government have found £20 billion of spending liabilities they did not know about, this could be true, as £20 billion is not that much when you look at total Government expenditure. Government department are making decisions on spending all of the time and it could be the previous Government were planning tax changes and/or spending cuts to balance the books.  Jeremy Hunt has recently said that if the Tories had stayed in Government and held an Autumn budget, it would have been very difficult to cut taxes as some had wanted.
    • Everyone knows the tories were hiding the costs - and even added 4 billion quid to the taxpayers high interest credit card to fund a chunk of the NI tax reduction - prime example - look at how much cost was hidden re the Rwanda dogwhistle -10 Billion quid     and re the handful of rebels on the benefit limit If the disasters (like the Rwanda rubbish) of Tory dogs being wagged by the extremist minority ERG tail doesn't highlight the issues .. Enlighten yourself here .. (fat chance) Sir Keir Starmer is right to show Labour rebels the door WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK Editorial: Suspending seven MPs following their rebellion over the two-child benefit cap is more than a prime minister flexing his political muscle. It is a...  
    • Trump instigated that didnt he @theoldrouge despite losing the election - and Biden mitigated as much as he could within his boundaries?   "President Donald Trump ordered a rapid withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Afghanistan and Somalia in the wake of his 2020 election loss"   “The order was for an immediate withdrawal, and it would have been catastrophic,” said Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., one of two Republican members of the special panel. “And yet President Trump signed the order.”   Trump ordered rapid withdrawal from Afghanistan after election loss WWW.MILITARYTIMES.COM The memo was among the latest revelations from the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol building.   Although i agree that Biden should have done more to mitigate Trump driven disasters
    • ok your WS is wrong. Paragraph 16 and 17 says  you did not contract with evri but this is not true - see below  Furthermore to the eBay Powered By Packlink T&Cs that Evri is referring to, Clauses 3b and c of the T&Cs states:  (b)   Packlink is a package dispatch search engine that acts as an intermediary between its Users and Transport Agencies. Through the Website, Users can check the prices that different Transport Agencies offer for shipments and contract with the Transport Agency that best suits their needs on-line. (c)  Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency post 251 of occy thread - £844 lost    you should also add a paragraph on donough v Stevenson talking about the fact that even without contract there is still duty of care to goods and by failing to deliver this duty has been breached.   Make those changes and post it back up here and I'll check over things again
    • no we cant add the occy thing because leicster are being difficult people so we're just going to go without it for now
  • 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
      • 162 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

Buchanan Clark & Wells (Student Loans Company Ltd)


damonz
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5055 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

I am looking for some advice regarding a very old debt to the Student Loans Company Ltd.

The loan dates back to 1993 and 1994 (16-17 years ago!) and since that time I have had no contact with the SLC or any DCA. If fact I was overseas until the last 3 years.

All of a sudden in July this year I started getting threatening letters out of the blue from Buchanan Clark & Wells (Formal Demands).

Up until now I have just ignored the letters; however yesterday I call was made to my employer's main number telling my collegue they would like to speak to me regarding a student loan debt.

The call was transferred to me and they asked me to verify my DOB and address which I refused and they proceeded to try and give me their phone number and reference number to call back (which I have not done).

 

My question is: I believe that this debt should be statute barred and is there any advantage in writing to them to state this, or continue to ignore?

Second issue is that I have never given my employer's details on any credit application and it is not on my credit file as I have not been working for this company that long.

I did however have it listed on the LinkedIn website (business social networking) - since removed. So I am quite sure they used this website to obtain this information, is this illegal? can a DCA use such information to try and make contact?

 

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Damonz,

Welcome to CAG!

 

I don't think you've got anything to worry about here as being an old style Student Loan it comes under the Statute of Limitations. If you haven't made any payment or acknowledged the debt for 6 years (5 in Scotland) then the debt is Statute Barred.

BCW know this full well and are just chancing their arm.

 

Don't ever talk to them on the phone.

 

Send them the letter in this link, amend to suit:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/599-letter-sent-when-debt-is-statute-barred

 

Let us know if they pester you again.

 

Elsa x

Link to post
Share on other sites

AFAIK, they can and do use info in the public domain to trace people. However! Regarding them contacting you at work, that is against Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidelines and you should add a paragraph to your letter stating this and that you will be reporting them to Trading Standards and the OFT.State also that you will ONLY deal with this matter in writing.

 

regards,

 

Elsa x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Elsa, I have sent the letter off to them today.

They continue to call me every day at work and I refuse to speak to them referring that I only communicate in writing.

It is getting too much now and he threaten to send someone around to my home to talk to me "face to face" about the matter if I didn’t talk to him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Cartaphilus
They continue to call me every day at work and I refuse to speak to them referring that I only communicate in writing

 

Then report them and ask them to spell out the words by writing 1000 times 'h.a.r.a.s.s.m.e.n.t'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They will send nobody to your home. It is all intimidation tactics to get you to make a payment there and then on the phone. It is statue barred, there is nothing they can do to make you pay it.

 

Just refuse point blank to discuss it on the phone. If they continue to harrass you, report them as advised.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...