Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would suggest also that you telephone the ombudsman tomorrow and ask them for details of the complaint that they have received from you and tell them that you want it in writing.  You will be amazed how scant The records of which are kept by these people. Read our customer services guide and at least actually give you some idea of how you should deal with customer service people or any call handlers on the telephone.  It is very important that you get a written summary of the report which you made to the ombudsman so that you can see exactly what they are investigating. The complaint to the ombudsman should have been very carefully considered over a period of time rather than simply made in a phone call
    • You should start putting everything in writing. Even the ombudsman, to begin a serious complaint by telephone is quite frankly crazy. I hope you have taken a copy of at least the advertisement that you have posted above.  I don't suppose that you kept a copy of the original AutoTrader advertisement.  How much in writing have you got of anything?    
    • Funnily enough the ad is still available online Range Rover 4.4 SDV8 Autobiography LWB Previously Sold | Clinkard Performance Cars WWW.CLINKARDCARS.CO.UK Performance, Prestigious and Specialist cars Dealers in Romsey, Hampshire but the autotrader version isn't which was probably slightly different potentially with more information. Reported to FOS over the phone but essentially gave them the same information I've stated here, updating them that I'm paying for a car I haven't had for nearly a month now etc I'll certainly come back with an update. Fingers crossed they will realise it's not worth taking to court. So the inspection among other things found a hairline crack across a load bearing section of the chasis which at the minute to the naked eye looks tiny but could turn out to be catastrophic and has had some filler chucked on top of it but we'll see what Clinkards inspection comes back with. Distance wise I believe they're around 165-170 miles away from me. Also I'm sure many people will have PCP agreements as it's the most common way to buy cars under 5 years old but they just forgotten the terminology or name for it. Pay deposit, choose a length then pay the difference between value today and guaranteed future value at the end of that agreed term   Whole experience has scarred me and moving forward I'd be tempted to pay for a pre purchase inspection myself because these guys are bigggg traders with a lot of top end cars. I just hope they don't make any more silly offers
    • Strange final response. They say that they are still investigating but they are giving you their final response anyway. Seems like a load of nonsense. Have you got a copy of what you then sent to the ombudsman? Anyway, for the moment although would like to know – it really is all for curiosity because as you have put it into the hands of the ombudsman it's probably not worth doing anything more until you have a reply. I would suggest that when you decide to spend this kind of money in future on a used car, that you understand exactly what your rights are before you make the purchase. When you buy anything – and maybe especially used car you should realise that you aren't only paying for the car, you are also paying for a bundle of consumer obligations which are intended to bind the dealer. You are paying for a vehicle which is of satisfactory quality and remains that way for a reasonable period of time and you are paying for any defects which emerge to be addressed and repaired at the expense of the dealer. We've already pointed out that by purchasing the warranty, they have effectively persuaded you to pay for something for which you have already paid. Very decent of you not to want to cause trouble in respect of defects which manifested themselves within the first few weeks. I have no idea why. For £78,000…. This you say that they were age-related problems – that is still no reason why those defects should have been there or why the dealer should not have been responsible for them. It seems to me that you have a clear case against the dealer/the finance company. We don't have many or any PCP purchases on this forum. However, it seems to me that the finance company is probably responsible for the condition of the vehicle because effectively you have bought it from them and to that extent it should be the same as HP. With a hire purchase agreement, it is as if you bought the vehicle directly from the finance company not from the dealer and it is the finance company which bears all the consumer obligations. I think the only thing you can do is to monitor the situation. Update us when you hear from the financial ombudsman and if you need to take the matter to court then we will help you. In principle it should be straightforward – but certainly there is a risk of a serious bill for costs if you lose. I don't see you losing. Did you say somewhere that the report suggested that the vehicle was unroadworthy? Have you got the advertisement for the vehicle? Does it make claims for the vehicle which are clearly untrue? And by the way, four hours away from you is what kind of distance? Have you read our used car guide? Have you looked at the video?
    • there's one in this thread.. i wonder if its the same, they seem to be identical regardless each time we have a thread with one Vehicle Control Services Privacy Notice, Brooke Retail Car Park, HA4 0LN - Private Land Parking Enforcement - Consumer Action Group  
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4947 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

1. The issue I bring to CAG is a matter of alleged harassment of a Debtor by a Creditor. In that My wife and I allege that the course of conduct complained of constituted a course of conduct which on the balance of probability a reasonable man in possession of all the facts would consider to be harassment.

2. The Legislation

The relevant language of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 reads as follows:

Prohibition of harassment.

1(1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct—

(a) which amounts to harassment of another, and

(b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.

Offence of harassment.

2(1) A person who pursues a course of conduct in breach of section 1 is guilty of an offence.

(2) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or both.

Civil remedy.

3(1) An actual or apprehended breach of section 1 may be the subject of a claim in civil proceedings by the person who is or may be the victim of the course of conduct in question.

(2) On such a claim, damages may be awarded for (among other things) any anxiety caused by the harassment and any financial loss resulting from the harassment.

Interpretation of this group of sections

7(1) This section applies for the interpretation of sections 1 to 5A

(2) References to harassing a person included alarming the person or causing the person distress

 

3. We also allege that sections of both the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the OFT Final Guidance on Debt Collection have been breached. As well as breaches of our right to privacy and BC's implied obligation of confidentiality owed to me, the First Claimant their customer.

 

4. To summarise, starting in mid 2006 I began to suffer some ill health. By November of 2006 I had been off work a number of months and my condition was still deteriorating. During November of 2006 I wrote to BC with whom I had a Credit Card account, requesting that they accepted a reduced monthly repayment on the ground of my suffering financial hardship due to the health issue.

5. From this point on and until approximately mid 2008 the account concerned was serviced in the varied manner. Then during the summer of 2008 BC bought up another debt in my name from another Credit Card Company.(Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Card Services) I claim that from this point on there followed a catalogue of utter confusion, errors and the alleged unlawful harassment acts on the part of BC.

 

6. Our case is that BC made mistake after mistake with the account, sent bill after bill and threatened the me with letter after threatening letter.

 

7. The Debt was then passed between a number of agents, and I then began receiving repeated, frequent and duplicated demands from them all. Each company vying for the payment.

 

8. We allege that there then begun a campaign of telephone calls and texted messages, again frequent and duplicated from the numerous companies, these calls, numbered into several hundred calls and spanned over two years. Starting in Approximately September/October of 2008 and continuing until February of 2010.

 

9. We claim that us and our witnesses will give evidence to demonstrate that nothing any of us could do, would influence or stop it. We will offer the court a large quantity of written communication all of which supports my case. I will argue that matters got so out of hand by the autumn of 2008 that I declined to communicate with BC by telephone, instead, I insisted that BC write to me.

 

10. We also allege that the calls received from BC and their agents were received on two different numbers, calls to our home telephone and calls to our son’s mobile. The calls then took four forms; Silent calls, manned calls, left messages and texts. Due to my poor health; a walking disability and my daily use of an IPAP lung ventilator for 9 hours a day, it is claimed that it was normally my wife who had to go to answer the home telephone. This disturbing both her rest and her work. Our son had similar experiences, receiving repeated and frequent calls from BC and their agents. The threats, texts and demands made to the son’s mobile telephone were similar in nature to the ones received by my wife and I on our home telephone.

 

11. It is claimed that the basic thread of the demands and threats was; that unless I made full payment of an outstanding balance of almost £9000 then BC or their agents would start legal proceedings, BC would send out a debt collector to our home and, BC would keep ringing until they got what they wanted.

 

12. We for our part wrote letter after letter to BC and their agents (Mercers and Calder) pointing out that I was very ill and that I was unable and unwilling to discuss matters over the telephone with BC.

Instead I suggested in my letters to BC that they contact me in writing and by so doing, there would be a clear record of what was said and done by both parties. I allege that BC very rarely responded to my letters and that when they did they evaded my points preferring instead to make their demands.

 

13. In 2008 when the calls and texts began I wrote to advise BC that they were in fact texting and telephoning my son on occasion and that this was causing both father and son embarrassment and breaching my right to privacy and confidentiality. There followed a number of other calls and letters on the subject but again nothing could stop BC's calls and texts to our son. This so much so it is claimed that the last call and message received from BC in February of 2010 was received on the mobile telephone which our son had been using.

 

14. My wife has given evidence that on two occasions she tried to telephone BC with her complaints, (with all the difficulty of getting through), but to no avail. Mainly her efforts and my efforts, letters and calls received no response.

 

15. Sometimes during the calls I claim we received apologies and assurances from BC that the calls would stop. Unfortunately we will give evidence that any comfort taken from the assurances made by BC was short lived as invariably the calls restarted usually within hours and the bills and threats continued.

 

16. Finally in January 2009 I complained to the Financial Ombudsman’s Service. I complained that our Christmas 2008 had been devastated by the barrage of calls received from BC and their agents. My complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service was upheld and the Ombudsman ruled in my favour in July 2009.

 

17. During the Ombudsman’s investigation it became clear that BC were ignoring the Ombudsman’s communications too. On this I will offer the court copies of the chase up letters sent to BC by the Ombudsman. Which we believe will show the Ombudsman’s frustration. I suggest that these letters, and the Defendants lack of concern and response, demonstrate just how off the lead and out of control BC's attitude and ethics are.

 

18. As a result of the Financial Ombudsman intervention BC ultimately agreed to delete mine and my sons mobile numbers from their systems and agreed to change the preference on my account to written communication only. It was suggested by BC that they had taken these steps to avoid future issues. Unfortunately we allege that even before the Ombudsman had finalised his case BC resumed their calling and texting campaign again. There followed several hundred more calls. These calls climaxing again around the Christmas holiday of 2009, with us receiving 10, 12, or 14 calls in a day on some days and that these calls and texts continuing to the early part of February 2010 which is after the issue of this Claim.

 

19. I have stated that my wife and I have wasted many hours writing to BC in an attempt to communicate with them and stop the harassment we have suffered, more importantly, both of us were brought to a state of considerable anxiety, frustration and distress by the constant calls. I lived in constant fear, not knowing whether debt collectors would call at any time, whether I would have legal proceedings served upon me or whether the calls would just keep coming. It can be seen that even after giving assurances to the Financial Ombudsman Service that BC still continued with their campaign of calls and took my wife and I to the point of having to issue the current proceedings to stop the calls.

 

20. We claim that BC's course of conduct amounts to unlawful harassment contrary to the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, that BC have also breached the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and have breach virtually every aspect and rules laid down by the Office of Fair Trading within their “Final Guidance on Debt Collections Activity”.

 

21. We claim £0,000 for distress and anxiety and £0,000 for financial loss due to time lost, loss of enjoyment of their home and their home life in dealing with BC and their agents. My principal object is to end my relationship with BC.

 

22. We believes that BC's debt collection policy is one based on harassment, that BC use the illegal tactics complained of in this matter and do so , knowing full well the levels of distress and damage they are causing. We also believe the acts we have witnessed have formed a cycle of events and that we have, during their long period of harassment, gone through almost three cycles of BC's harassment machine.

 

23. We believe that BC cannot blame their information technology or blame their acts on simple mistakes and omissions. We believe we can satisfactorily demonstrate to the court through witness and documentary evidence that BC knew of the impact their alleged actions. Or at the very least “ought to of known” the impact of their actions. And that the said actions complained of by my wife and I do so constitute a deliberate “course of conduct” and that the “course of conduct” amounting to the harassment complained of and was of sufficient “gravity” to be likely to cause distress, anxiety and loss to us, the Claimants, which is the test we have to satisfy, on the balance of probabilities.

 

24. I feel sure we are not alone in their suffering and that BC should be forced to change their business practices and policies complained of and, that this enforced change would be in the public interest. We maintain that BC were responsible and liable for not only their own actions but for the actions of their agents and had a duty to ensure the acts of all others were compliant with the law. We contend BC wanted all of the profits from the accounts but were unwilling to accept any of the responsibilities.

 

25. BC state that they deny each cause of action relied upon by us and puts us to proof of all matters alleged against BC.

 

 

26. I allege that it was I who had an account with them failed to keep up with repayments and that this resulting in arrears developing and consequently charges were levied and debited to my account. These charges were added to the balance each month.

 

27. BC make no admissions in relation to the operation of the second (Morgan Stanley, Goldfish) account which they claim they took over control of in October of 2008. BC claim they wrote to me in the January of 2009 stating that they acknowledged that a repayment plan which was established in June 2008 was in existence in relation to the Master Card account.

 

29. In the Defence BC make no admission as to the relevance of any complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service concerning the matters giving rise to the claim. BC makes no reference to the findings of the Ombudsman after his investigation or the alleged assurances given to the Ombudsman by BC in relation to their conduct towards me.

 

30. BC deny making calls to me in the October of 2008 and further more it is denied that any such calls were made by BC to me amounted to pursuit of an unreasonable course of conduct which amounted to the harassment of me. Instead they state that there was a default under the repayment plan agreed and that accordingly BC were reasonably entitled to attempt contact with me, so as to discuss the default and to make an arrangement for the default to be rectified.

 

31. BC make the point that both of the accounts I held and referred to in the Particulars of Claim were not linked.

 

32. BC deny that they harassed our son with “almost hourly” attempted calls from November 2009 onwards as has been alleged.

 

33. BC do admit that I had written to BC that BC was at all material times fully entitled to demand either a full or partial repayment of the balance due on the Platinum account and the Master Card account.

 

34. BC have denied all of the Claim stating that they have done no wrong; that they have done all that is required of them. BC contend that their conduct was all part of their normal business activity in an attempt to recover debts which were owed to them by me.

 

35. BC maintain that it is perfectly acceptable for them to treat consumers in the manner they did. BC impugn the allegations made in full and have argued that some of the incidents complained of by my wife and I simply did not happen.

 

36. BC have put me to strict proof and deny all of the Claim.

 

If anyone in CAG land has any ideas, law I could use or advice I would welcome serious input. My case is set for court in November and my battle against the Giant BC will begin in ernest.

Does anyone know of a Barrister that will take direct instruction on a case like this.

Does anyone know a good cheap barrister?

Wish me luck!!:mad2::mad2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi HP,

 

I've removed the duplicate thread to avoid duplicate postings in response. Also retitled the thread for you.

 

Is the above your POC's for a claim against BC or just a summary of events to date.

 

8-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

THanks Slick I will get used to the system quick.

The posting is a summary of events and to say it is without the detail is an understantement. I have sent so many letters and received so many calls from BC. My poor wife didn't know what to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi HP,

 

I've been through your post above and have a few Q's.

 

1. What stages of court proceedings have you been through so far - it looks like you've filed a claim and BC have defended.

 

2. Have you completed AQ's and, has the case been Allocated to any Track yet.

 

3. Has there been any Case Management or Directions Hearings.

 

4. I note you say there's a hearing in November. What type of hearing will this be and what court Directions have been given in respect of this.

 

5. Have you been directed to file your evidence, Witness Statements, etc

 

6. Have you taken legal advice, either now or previously.

 

7. Did you prepare your own POC's.

 

8. Who did you name as the Defendant on your N1 Claim.

 

I'll let you know if we want sight of your POC's or Barclays' Defence

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Slick

 

1. THe case is listed for trial of 3 days starting 11th November.

2. Yes AQ's were done some mopnths ago.

3. JUdge ordered direction in absentia. BAsically disclosure by list was in JUne followed by disclosure and exchange of witness statements in July.

4. Direction for case in November are that Claimant ids to draft synosis. ( You read it) and prepare a bundle paginated and indexed including all the law relied upon.

5. Yes evidence and statements were all diclosed and exchanged by JUly.

6. No legal advice. I had no choice but to file, they just woulnt stop calling and my wife was almost suicidal. I filed to defend us. In any event I have no money or savings left I have been very sick for the past 4 years so legal advice was not an option.

7.I did prepare my own POC.

8. Barclaycard UK

 

Thanks for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for this further info.

 

2. You didn't say what Track the case is allocated to.

 

7. Did you use any books or guidance in preparing your POC's, or have you had experience of this before.

 

8. Have Barclays said in their Defence anything about you incorrectly filing the claim against Barclaycard UK. Barclays have used the issue of their name to complicate litigation in the past. See here - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?173450-Use-the-right-name-when-Filing-against-BC

 

Are you challenging the credit agreement for either BC a/c, or seeking any ruling about the enforceability of the a/c's.

 

Are you reclaiming any unlawful penalty charges added to either a/c.

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

subbing

 

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

Thanks to you guys,

More answers

 

1. Track is multi track.

2.I used a copy of Blackstones CPR 2009 to help with the POC. They have said they were over long and that I was pleading my case in them but from what I have seen they play dirty anyway.

3. They have moaned about the title on the claim and state I must put a Ltd on the ned. I have said I am willing to ask the judge to amend on the first day of trial. The law says a name is nothing. Its what something is intended to be that matters.

4. I have no formal training in law but learn fast and read lots. I'm a counsellor.

5. I am challenging the credit agreements and will be asking the judge to make a ruling on the whole sorry mess.

6. Im not reclaiming any charges as yet its complex enough without the added charges issues.

7. One of you guys asked me did I log the calls and the answer is yes. We obviously did log the early ones as we didn't expect what we got. BUt we did log over 300 calls and have photo's of my son's mobile I phone showing the calls and texts he kept getting along with the daily 3 pages I was emailing to BC. The bundle is about 700 pages. I personally don't think 3 days is enough.

 

I cannot begin to describe how badly these animals have treated my wife and family while I was just to sick to do anything. Unfortunately for them I defied death and I am here seeking to show them for what they are and to get the law changed to help people who are suffering at their hands.

 

Thanks again all, any questions lets have them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Heypresto,

 

Wowzers thats a large bundle :-D

 

Theres not another firm I'd like to see brought to task for the way they treat "customers" more than Barclays at present. I do so hope you succeed, Multi-Track costs can be extensive although im sure youve weighed all this up prior to continuing down this path. I take it Barclays have farmed this outside of their own internal litigation team now?

 

If you need any info on challenging the agreements, copies of like agreements and terms and conditions to compare against... you'll find a large ex-MSDW family on here :-) myself being one also. Agreements need to be examined closely to ensure they are compliant and that terms and conditions supplied with them were actually produced at that time (ref codes normally give away the year/month etc etc)

 

The only real advice I can give at present in relation to the unenforcability of the agreements is to look up carey vs hsbc and be ready to counter Barclays claims of reconstructed agreements if they make it. Also Brandon vs Amex for requirements of default notice and termination.

 

Edit: Oh just one other thing, its become clearer that just stating that the agreement was non-compliant is NOT enough nowdays, proof positive that the agreement is non-compliant appears to be required by judges to "weed" out the real claims from the fishing expeditions. Please also be advised that as the claimant the onus is on YOU to prove anything you state.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For almost 2 years we have had some accounts with Barbyshark that are very similar to the above. They are experts at passing the buck over to their in-house pals Calder who are Mercers.

We have massive Payment Break Plan which they added to one accounts and the so-called agreements on both accounts are just crappy terms and conditions - plus one totally illegible app form .

 

The tactics they have used are odious in my opinion and have created great stress. They sent letters threatening visits then fail to arrive, they ring at all hours when one has told them to desist and other assorted nonsense. I would recommend first buying a Truecall machine (worth every penny) as this kills off their first line of attack and gives you the pleasure of knowing that the plonker on the other end can never reach you, JOY!

 

I did take them to court for an admin fee and won. However, latest efforts have turned up an even better way to hit these fools.

 

Prove that they have harassed you, via breaching the CCA, and you will then most likely get a judge to agree with your claim for compensation for this unwarranted harassment.

 

There is possibly no need to attack the apathetic trade authorities and it is best to try and get them on side over this. Keep emotion out as that is our enemy – just stick to cold hard fact.

 

Also get carefully looking at the SAR printouts. Why? Well my partner owns the phone and in the bad old days before we had Truecall the swine were always ringing. We asked them to stop and they carried on. The SAR data gives evidence that they admitted to carrying on after being politely asked to bog off. This therefore is evidence of abuse/breach of the act. And we also know that BC has been fined 50k for silliness with phone calls so...lol

 

Yes - they are asking for it and everyone needs to complain about the swine acting against the OFT guidelines

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...