Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • worthy to not forget Just to let you know this bunch Kensington have been fined £1.225m by the financial regulator for treating borrowers who were in arrears unfairly. Claim those charges back plus the interest and tell them not to add any more to the account. There are a few news stories here you can get the info for a letter to send to them. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8615870.stm  
    • Hi All. I went to visit a family friend in Rochdale on a new housing estate opposite a old row of houses. The location is Royle Road, Postcode OL11 3PE. I was originally parked in parking bays outside the old houses, then moved the car, when I noticed my tyre was flat, so parked on what looked like double yellows to use his air pump to check and inflate the tyres before we left the house.   In the time i went inside to sort the pump and power supply i got a PCN.  The tyre then got changed (has a puncture) and we left. PCN Number:         RE######## Date:             04/05/2024 Time:             20:36 Observation:         20:34 to 20:36 Reported location:     Royle Park Road Reason:        Parked in a restricted street during prescribed hours (Code: 01) I believe this PCN is not correct and has grounds to appeal: 1. My friend who moved into the property around 6 months ago, swears that even though it has old double yellows marked, they are not current or council marked.   He said the property development company had said they had marked them for ease of access during development. 2. The road i was parked on was Royle Road.  The PCN was issued for Royle Park Road, which is about 400 yards up the road. 3. There are no sign posts or marking showing parking  restriction hours in the entire area (there maybe on Royle park Road). I have attached a map of the Location where i parked as a red dot. I have 2 questions: a.  Is there a way to check where double yellow lines are marked on some register to check if they are current? b. Can my grounds of appeal simply be, wrong location, wrong offence? Thanks in advance. Map_20240505.pdf
    • you made it very confusing, though i doubt any of it was ever read by the delivery franchise for DPD. your saving grace might well be you didn't select your own address (though if you are all the same postcode..??) and neither mentioned a safe space other than another neighbour. but with the actual delivery address on the parcel, it appears the driver had a choice of 3 addresses, all under the same post code with differing house numbers. so chose the label one but left it on your doorstep. play it carefully and along with the photo and the retailers requirement you should be ok.   dx  
    • Are Resident car parks subject to Planning permission under Town and Country Planning {control of Advertisements ] Regulations? SCHEDULE 1CLASSES OF ADVERTISEMENT TO WHICH PARTS 2 AND 3 DO NOT APPLY Class A "1.  The advertisement is not readily visible from outside the enclosed land or from any place to which the public have a right of access." As a private residential site does the public have a right of access? This particular Act has so many caveats that even many Councils do not understand it and that includes me. Though I do understand it better than many council planning departments.
  • 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

'Silverpoint delivery service' card in your door - HFO Services?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4622 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

  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I rang the number - answered by a computer, and then through to an operator in India, who answers: 'Silverpoint, how can I help you'.

 

Me: 'Hello, is that HFO?'

 

Operator (after a long pause): 'Err, this is Silverpoint'.

 

Me: 'OK, I'd like to get some documents delivered in Birmingham, and I see from your website that you do that. How do I arrange it?'

 

Op: 'Do you have a reference number?'

 

Me: 'No, I want you to deliver some documents for m. Why would I have a reference?'

 

Op: 'We deliver the packages from the sender. Do you have a reference?'

 

Me: 'On your website it says that you are based in Birmingham and you are a specialist courier. Is that right?'

 

Op: 'We are based in India. I deal with the incoming calls when you have a letter or something'

 

Me: 'So are you connected to a company called HFO'

 

Op: 'Sir I'll have to put you through to another department'

 

I hung up at this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I rang the number - answered by a computer, and then through to an operator in India, who answers: 'Silverpoint, how can I help you'.

 

Me: 'Hello, is that HFO?'

 

Operator (after a long pause): 'Err, this is Silverpoint'.

 

Me: 'OK, I'd like to get some documents delivered in Birmingham, and I see from your website that you do that. How do I arrange it?'

 

Op: 'Do you have a reference number?'

 

Me: 'No, I want you to deliver some documents for m. Why would I have a reference?'

 

Op: 'We deliver the packages from the sender. Do you have a reference?'

 

Me: 'On your website it says that you are based in Birmingham and you are a specialist courier. Is that right?'

 

Op: 'We are based in India. I deal with the incoming calls when you have a letter or something'

 

Me: 'So are you connected to a company called HFO'

 

Op: 'Sir I'll have to put you through to another department'

 

I hung up at this point.

 

 

nice one:lol:

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This kind of set up breaks every rule in the OFT book. Cod website, cod company, cod office. More than fishy.

 

I note HFO Services STILL haven’t had their CC licence renewed – it’s been pending for over a year...

 

Norfolk House? Norfolk and Chance, more like.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://yfrog.com/7fsilverpointg

my complaint is long winded along with a reminder of what they stand for the oft that is

 

look here

Press releases 2010 -

 

 

OFT takes action to address widespread problems in debt management industry

 

minimum-amount-due.jpg 101/10 28 September 2010

The OFT has told 129 debt management firms that they face losing their consumer credit licences unless immediate action is taken to comply with its Debt Management Guidance.

The firms are required to provide independently audited evidence within three months that action has been taken to address identified concerns. If evidence is not provided, the OFT will instigate licensing action.

The formal warnings follow an OFT review of the debt management sector, published today, which found widespread problems.

Debt management companies, which sit alongside free government-funded and charitable services, are fee-charging firms that provide advice and solutions to consumers with debt problems. The services they offer can include arranging IVAs, setting up debt management plans, and negotiating settlements with creditors. Consumers contacting debt management companies tend to be over-indebted, vulnerable and desperate for help with managing their financial difficulties.

The key findings to emerge from the review, which included onsite compliance visits by Trading Standards Officers, a website sweep and a mystery shopping exercise, are that:

 

  • misleading advertising is the most significant area of non-compliance, in particular failing to disclose a fee is retained by the business and misrepresenting debt management services as being free when they are not
  • frontline advisers working for debt management companies are lacking in competence and are providing poor advice based on inadequate information
  • there is low industry awareness of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) rules for resolving consumer complaints.

Today's OFT report sets out a detailed action plan to improve standards across the industry, focusing on robust enforcement action against licensees that fail, or refuse, to change advertising and/or behaviour.

The OFT also plans to update its Guidance to take explicit account of new and emerging unfair business practices, and will work with the two main trade bodies, the Debt Managers Standards Association (DEMSA) and the Debt Resolution Forum (DRF) to support their initiatives to introduce higher standards into the industry.

Ray Watson, Director of the OFT's Consumer Credit Group, said:

'People who are heavily indebted, desperate and vulnerable need advice which makes their problem better not worse and should not be exploited. Debt management firms must be clear about their charges and the options available to customers.

'The level of non-compliance we found across the industry is unacceptable. If any of the 129 firms identified do not improve their standards substantially they will be the subject of licensing action by the OFT.

'We are also looking to the two main industry bodies to lead the way in raising standards and to meet their commitments to make the industry more professional and responsible.'

Since April 2008 when the OFT obtained new powers under the Consumer Credit Act, it has taken 37 formal actions to impose requirements or refuse or revoke licences held or applied for by debt management businesses. Other OFT actions have included shutting down websites, and addressing issues such as companies masquerading as charities, systemic cold-calling and the mis-selling of IVAs. It has also worked with Trading Standards to take injunctive action to stop 'debt sale' scams.

NOTES

 

  1. Download the full findings of the review (pdf 592kb).
  2. The OFT is not able to name the 129 companies because of disclosure restrictions under Part 9 of the Enterprise Act 2002. Where the OFT uses its formal powers under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to refuse or revoke a credit licence, decisions are made public on the Consumer Credit Public Register.
  3. The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the Act) places a duty on the OFT to ensure that licences are only given to and retained by those who are fit to hold them. The OFT's Debt Management Guidance (pdf 218kb) (updated September 2008) sets out the minimum standards for this industry. The OFT takes the view that a failure to adhere to the minimum standards in the Guidance could be considered to be engaging in business practices which are unfair or improper (whether lawful or not) under Section 25(2A)(e) of the Act and can be considered as evidence leading to formal OFT action.
  4. The OFT launched the Debt Management Compliance Review in November 2009. The methodology included an internet advertising compliance sweep of 100 debt advice and debt management websites, questionnaires, meetings with trade associations, consumer representative bodies and government departments, on-site compliance visits, a mystery shopping study and a complaint form for consumers on the OFT's website. Download the mystery shopping report (pdf 764kb)
  5. DEMSA and the DRF have assured the OFT that they are fully committed to remedying the non-compliances of their members and making the industry more professional and more responsible. Following intervention from DEMSA, its members have already taken corrective action to address identified issues of non-compliance. The DRF has also made progress in remedying the highlighted non-compliances by its members including issuing best practice guidelines. Commitments from the trade associations, secured as part of the OFT's review, include plans to introduce robust compliance monitoring systems for their members, to develop accredited training programmes and to operate independent consumer complaint panels, as well as taking more active steps to address members' non-compliance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so the standards operated by HFO has got worse and they are just ignoring the RULE BOOK completely time for all your complaints guys ,let see alice out of business and his licence revoked by the SRA as the tactics he is using is like he is running some sort of mafia outfit ..

and his unlawful defaults go for a personal lawsuit for damages against ALICE as he being a sole director is aware of the consequences of issuing knowingly unlawful defaults he cannot escape this as he personally is trained in law so errors cannot be used in this instance ....he can afford the payouts

patrickq1

Link to post
Share on other sites

That isn't the HFO case number which is 8 digits - shame. I don't think I have seen so many people viewing a thread as this one this afternoon - not many guests though. Bit disappointed to not find a card when I got home. May be worth some recipient reporting it to the authorities as a possible money [problem] - it looks like one,, with the promise of possible riches, - just a thought. It strikes me that this company must have studied at the school of fleecers and con artists as these are the methods they deploy.

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read Silverpoints site i will be calling them tomorrow - they deliver legal documents -

 

I want them to deliver a defence to Turnbull & Rutherford for me.

 

The phone lines might be busy tomorrow:wink:

US President Barack Obama referred to Ugland House as the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax SCA* in the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read Silverpoints site i will be calling them tomorrow - they deliver legal documents -

 

I want them to deliver a defence to Turnbull & Rutherford for me.

 

Loving this idea:lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...