Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • old and new threads merged i though you were going to send the SB letter in 2017? dx  
    • dunno you've not scanned up what you've had before how can we tell?  
    • Today , after a lot of years i received a letter from this lot. Very friendly, "Were writing to remind you that we haven't had any contact from you in a while".  The velvet fist, followed by  a veiled threat to get their preferred debt collectors involved. Yep dead right. In 1992/3 I took out a Student load under duress from DHSS. up to 2000 I had successfully gotten deferment on low income. But rather than sign on as unemployed ,I decided to be self employed. I applied and they asked for all sorts of documents. I obliged and then correspondence ceased from them, circa 2001. To date I have had no correspondence from Student Loans. I was made redundant in 2009 and reached 65 in 2012 , at which age the loan should have been cancelled. Now , today, 12 years on retirement and 11 ( at least years after last contact) I get a letter with veiled threats. Do I , as I smell a scam a) ignore it and hope that Erudio will think that this phishing attempt has failed or b) respond with a statute barred letter or c) remind them of legal terms that loan should be cancelled 12 years ago or d) combination of b) +c)      
  • 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

Robinson Way


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4772 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

Robinson Way Default, What is my next step?  

9 Caggers have voted

  1. 1. Robinson Way Default, What is my next step?

    • Continue to play letter ping pong
      2
    • Offer to pay outstanding balance for removal of Default
      0
    • Initiate legal action
      7


Recommended Posts

Got an old Capital One account that is now owned by RW. The balance is under £200 and was defaulted for a little over £400 back in November 2006. Have played letter ping pong for a while regarding the account- unenforceable agreement, invalid default etc. In May I invited the Managing Director to take me to court for the monies they claim to be owed. Funnily enough, I've no heard a chirp from them since then.

 

Now the default is a big issue for me. I have a couple of others that drop off by mid 2011, although that won't stop me doing what I can to prove they were unlawful! This RW one will only drop off in November 2012. I desperately want to get it wiped by the time the other two are off. RW way are refusing to remove the default, claiming its was originally put on by Cap One, therefore it must be accurate. Cap One haven't even responded to my SAR other than to say my signature doesn't match. I complained to the ICO in February about Cap One and not complying with my SAR, and my complaint is still waiting to be allocated to an appropriate ICO bod.

 

So I put it to the good caggers as to my next step. Do I..?

 

a) continue letter ping pong?

b) offer to pay the outstanding balance on the condition the default is removed?

c) initiate legal proceedings?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi...Craigers...........If this debt is owned by Robinson way and the balance is £200 why not make them a F&F settlement of say £30 with all the safeguards in place,that F&F will not be passed to another DCA and your Credit File is marked settled.I am aware this approach is very much against our desire to win against such pondlife such as Robinson way.........,or fight them....just a thought...FS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send the fools a Letter before action, then take them to court and sue for damages, why these companies believe that they can continue to act in this manner without any recourse is bloody irritating, the sooner more people take them to task and issue them with court papers the sooner these :censored: might actually realise that what they are doing is going to cost them a pretty penny and hopefully their Job.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

i'm going to have to send an lba. they have now closed the accont but refuse to remove the default stating the account history has to be accurately reported. this is despite the fact they have no proof the default is accurate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not take Capone to court for failing to comply with your SAR? They will find it extremely difficult to convince a judge that they failed to comply on the basis of a signature, when they happily flogged a debt and your data to a third party, especially if they made no other effort to establish your identity, and/or were writing to you beforehand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

in feb i complained to the ico about cap one and their failure to provide. the ico have just the other day written back siding with cap one. their decision is based on the fact that i had moved house but hadn't informed cap one, and the request for a signature was reasonable to identify me, despite the fact my signature has changed considerably.

 

before the account defaulted, i moved house and i forgot to inform cap one. they sold the account to RW so i am not going to inform cap one of subsequent address changes, am i.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Use the ICO's own complaints procedure for giving you duff info regarding having to provide proof that you are the alleged debtor, when it is in fact up to the DCA to confirm they have the correct person.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...