Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Shein has been linked to unethical business practices, including forced labour allegations.View the full article
    • Hi I have to agree with @unclebulgaria67 post#3 For the funding side of moving to a new area and it being private supported accommodation I would also suggest speaking to private supported accommodation provider about funding but also contact the Local Council for that area and have a chat with them about funding because if you are in receipt of Housing Benefit certain Supported Accommodation that meets a certain criteria is treated as ‘exempt accommodation’ for Housing Benefit purposes but you need to confirm this with that relevant Council in your new area especially since it is Private Supported Accommodation as each Council can have slightly different rules on this. If you have a certain medical condition look up the charities and also have a wee chat with them as they may be able to point you to different Grants to assist with moving costs and your question about funding for private supported accommodation as well.
    • Hi Just to be clear a Notice to Quit is only the very start of the Housing Association going down the Eviction route there is a long process to go. Also to be clear if you leave at the Notice to Quit date only and go to the Council claiming you are Homeless they will more than likely class you as Intentionally Homeless therefore you have no right to be given temporary housing by the Council. The only way that works is when the Court has Granted a Possession Order then you can approach the Council as Homeless with the Court Order. As for the Housing Association issuing the Notice to Quit because there investigation has proved it's not your main residence but you have witness statement to prove otherwise. From now on with the Housing Association you need to keep a very good paper trail and ensure to get free proof of posting from the post office with anything you send to them. You now need to make a Formal Complaint to the Housing Association and please amend the following to suit your needs:   Dear Sir/Madam FORMAL COMPLAINT Reference: Notice to Quit Letter Dated XX/XX/2024, Hand Delivered on XX/XX/2024 I note in your letter that you stated that the Housing Association has carried out an investigation into myself and came to the conclusion that I am not using this property as my main residence and have evidence of this and have therefore issued a 'Notice to Quit' by XX/XX/2024. I find the above actions absolutely disgraceful action by the Housing Association. 1. Why have I never been informed nor asked about this matter by my Housing Officer. 2. Why have I never been given the opportunity to defend myself before the Housing Association out of the blue Hand Delivered a Notice to Quit Letter. 3. I have evidence and witnesses/statements that prove this is my Main Residence and more than willing provide this to both the Housing Association and the Court. I now require the following: 1. Copy of your Complaints Policy (not the leaflet) 2. Copy of your Customer Care Charter (not the leaflet) 3. Copies of your Investigation into this not being my main residence.    As well as the above you need to send the Housing Association urgently a Subject Access Request (SAR) requesting 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whatever format they hold that in whether it be letters, email, recorded calls etc. The Housing Association then has 30 calendar days to respond but that time limit only starts once they acknowledge your SAR Request. If they fail to respond within that time limit its then off with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO).     
    • Hi Sorry for the delay in getting back to you The email excuse and I do say excuse to add to your account and if court decide LL can't recoup costs will be removed is a joke. So I would Ask them: Ask them to provide you with the exact terms within your Tenancy Agreement that allows them to add these Court Fees to your Account before it has been decided in Court by a Judge. Until the above is answered you require these Court Fees to be removed from your Account (Note: I will all be down to your Tenancy Agreement so have a good look through it to see what if any fees they can add to your account in these circumstances)
    • Thank you for your responses. As requested, some more detail. Please forgive, I'm writing this on my phone which always makes for less than perfect grammar. My Dad tries but English not his 1st language, i'm born and bred in England, a qualified accountant and i often help him with his admin. On this occasion I helped my dad put in his renewal driving licence application around 6 weeks before expiry and with it the disclosure of his sleep apnoea. Once the licence expired I told him to get in touch with his GP, because the DVLA were offering only radio silence at that time (excuses of backlogs When I called to chase up). The GP charged £30 for an opinion letter on his ability to drive based on his medical history- at the time I didn't take a copy of the letter, but I am hoping this will be key evidence that we can rely on as to why s88 applies because in the GP opinion they saw no reason he couldn't drive i need to see the letter again as im going only on memory- we forwarded the letter in a chase up / complaint to the DVLA.  In December, everything went quiet RE the sleep apnoea (i presume his GP had given assurance) but the DVLA noticed there had been a 2nd medical issue in the past, when my father suffered a one off mini stroke 3 years prior. That condition had long been resolved via an operation (on his brain of all places, it was a scary time, but he came through unscathed) and he's never had an issue since. We were able to respond to that query very promptly (within the 14 days) and the next communication was the licence being granted 2 months later. DVLA have been very slow in responding every step of the way.  I realise by not disclosing the mini stroke at the time, and again on renewal (had I known I'd have encouraged it) he was potentially committing an offence, however that is not relevant to the current charge being levied, which is that he was unable to rely on s88 because of a current medical issue (not one that had been resolved). I could be wrong, I'm not a legal expert! The letter is a summons I believe because its a speeding offence (59 in a temp roadworks 50 limit on the A1, ironically whist driving up to visit me). We pleaded guilty to the speeding but not guilty to the s87.  DVLA always confirmed to me on the phone that the licence had not been revoked and that he "May" be able to continue to drive. They also confirmed in writing, but the letter explains the DVLA offer no opinion on the matter and that its up to the driver to seek legal advice. I'll take the advice to contact DVLA medical group. I'm going to contact the GP to make sure they received the SAR request for data, and make it clear we need to see a copy of the opinion letter. In terms of whether to continue to fight this, or to continue with the defence, do we have any idea of the potential consequences of either option? Thanks all
  • 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

DLC at it again - help please!


M1sterP
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4932 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

No its not, but then you have the option to put the account into dispute, where as with a sar to a dca you do not

 

What is this whole CCA 'dispute' thing anyway? There is nothing (that I can find, and apologies if I'm blind!) that says a s77-79 request automatically places a debt into dispute. I'm certain it's simply a CAGism. Why would it be different from just stating to the creditor 'this debt is in dispute', or at least mention s2.8k of the OFT guidance on debt collection. I think what I'm getting at (in a longwinded way!) is that it doesn't take a CCA request to alert the creditor that a debt is disputed.

 

(Although just to confuse things I think a CCA request is worth sending in the OP's case)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Seq,

 

I've actually just placed an account in dispute - going in the post first thing in the morning - with Philips. They've had nearly a month to provide me with evidence that I owe the alleged debt, but all I've received is a letter threatening bailiffs. I actually have no recollection of this debt, so until they prove I owe it, it will stay in dispute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Seq,

 

I've actually just placed an account in dispute - going in the post first thing in the morning - with Philips. They've had nearly a month to provide me with evidence that I owe the alleged debt, but all I've received is a letter threatening bailiffs. I actually have no recollection of this debt, so until they prove I owe it, it will stay in dispute.

 

Absolutely! I think a dispute is just that! It doens't need to have any statutory underpinnings, it can be raised simply by informing the creditor.

 

(you'll have to excuse my mildly ranty attitude this evening, I've just been made aware by the garage that the sequencimobile needs a new clutch. ouch. there goes christmas)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely! I think a dispute is just that! It doens't need to have any statutory underpinnings, it can be raised simply by informing the creditor.

 

(you'll have to excuse my mildly ranty attitude this evening, I've just been made aware by the garage that the sequencimobile needs a new clutch. ouch. there goes christmas)

 

Seq, come to Wales and visit us and I'll show you how to change a clutch. Much cheaper!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi M1sterP

 

19th April 2010 you posted Direct Legal - Time For A CCA?

 

Your opening scenario was identical to this post, on the 20th April 2010 at 09:00 you stated obviously having listened to the advise from Jed52 that you would CCA DLC, what has happened in the intervening 6 months? did you CCA them?

 

PGH7447 offers the same sound advice, the route to follow by general concensous of opinion is CCA not SRA.

 

Your silence mystifys me, a respected cagger took the trouble to explain a point, which infact you already knew 6 months ago and in my opinion he took considerable flak for it, doesn't that warrant an acknowledgement?

 

I think the question that should be asked now is what was the purpose of your post?

 

Kind regards

 

C

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi M1sterP

 

19th April 2010 you posted Direct Legal - Time For A CCA?

 

Your opening scenario was identical to this post, on the 20th April 2010 at 09:00 you stated obviously having listened to the advise from Jed52 that you would CCA DLC, what has happened in the intervening 6 months? did you CCA them?

 

PGH7447 offers the same sound advice, the route to follow by general concensous of opinion is CCA not SRA.

 

Your silence mystifys me, a respected cagger took the trouble to explain a point, which infact you already knew 6 months ago and in my opinion he took considerable flak for it, doesn't that warrant an acknowledgement?

 

I think the question that should be asked now is what was the purpose of your post?

 

Kind regards

 

C

 

Hi CE - thank you for posting that. You have a point. I'm sure I don't need to point this out, but will anyway. You mentioned he took flak for his post, which I assume refers to my comments. Just for the record PGH, and I hope this is how you took it, it was purely a difference of opinion, definitely not anything personal, and I'm quite sure you and I will contiinue to post amicably alongside each other on here, even when we disagree!

 

Again CE - thanks. Even if the OP doesn't appreciiate it, I do just for pointing that out and giving me the chance to say sorry if it was needed.

 

Tingy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is this whole CCA 'dispute' thing anyway? There is nothing (that I can find, and apologies if I'm blind!) that says a s77-79 request automatically places a debt into dispute. I'm certain it's simply a CAGism. Why would it be different from just stating to the creditor 'this debt is in dispute', or at least mention s2.8k of the OFT guidance on debt collection. I think what I'm getting at (in a longwinded way!) is that it doesn't take a CCA request to alert the creditor that a debt is disputed.

 

 

(Although just to confuse things I think a CCA request is worth sending in the OP's case)

 

If they dont provide an agreement within the time period then it can be placed in dispute or have the rules changed again, in which case I may as well bugger off from the cag, because for the past 4 years that is what I have been saying and reading:!:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

 

It helps if we stay united.

 

Failure to respond within 14 days is a dispute.

 

Once they send any old crap, then it isn't.

 

There are plenty of other things to invoke a dispute or deadlock; harassment is one in my case. Then one has a complaint to FOS and OFT and clearly the account is in dispute.

 

Whilst the legal sands are shifting, there still appears to be a twitchyness if they haven't got any signed paperwork.

 

Anyway, onwards and upwards.

 

love to all

 

vic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Vic. We're all on board, it's an interesting case in point that's all!

 

I think what I'm trying to get at is that a dispute can be raised in various ways, it's not a pre-requisite to do the whole CCA thing (although for many people it's by far the best approach!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Vic. We're all on board, it's an interesting case in point that's all!

 

I think what I'm trying to get at is that a dispute can be raised in various ways, it's not a pre-requisite to do the whole CCA thing (although for many people it's by far the best approach!)

 

It is an interesting point but it is also nice to have some ammunition to throw at a dca and none production of an agreement in response to a cca request is just that Ammunition, whereas asking for all info including an agreement through a sar cost £9 more and the chances of the DCA actually trying to produce an agreement of any shape or form in response to a sar is pretty bloody remote.

 

and yes you can say to a dca "this account is in dispute because of xyz" but what is the point without something to back it up

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PGH

 

Or the lack of something for them to be able to back it up, maybe: "what's the point without something to back it up"?

 

From my current dealings, I detect that they're still nervous about lack of paperwork, although I wouldn't want to test that in court.

 

It's all part of the tactical game along the way, methinks.

 

Anyway, lots of love

 

vic

Link to post
Share on other sites

the chances of the DCA actually trying to produce an agreement of any shape or form in response to a sar is pretty bloody remote.

 

 

Excellent point, and remember that a SAR is all about the raw data and not how that data is presented. So a creditor doesn't have to supply the agreement at all under the SAR, they could type it out in lines if they so wished.

Link to post
Share on other sites

M1sterP starts another thread Wednesday afternoon…………….

 

 

DLC - the intimidation continues...

 

12:41……You may have seen a recent thread I started regarding DLC/Hillesden and their latest batch of intimidation letters (
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...3352&highlight

)

 

Today I received yet another letter but this one is new to me. It's entitled....

 

Notice of Sums in Arrears

This notice is given in compliance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 because you are behind with your payments on the following account....

 

It then goes on to state my account details and states that the account is with Hillesden Securities Ltd, formerly Egg Banking Plc.

 

It shows the opening balance (my current balance to them) then underneath that, it shows Arrears - and again shows my balance with them.

 

It then says:

 

Notices

For so long as you continue to be behind with your payments by any amount, you will be sent notices about this at least every 6 months. We are not required to send you notices more frequently than this, even if you get further behind with your payments in between notices.

 

With this letter/statement they've enclosed an OFT leaflet about being in arrears and what you should do.

 

The thing is this.....

 

I've been paying DLC regularly for a few years and payments have always been timely (and not one missed). My balance with them has been slashed by a good few thousand pounds and I am not in any arrears with them. Yes there's an outstanding balance, but I've never fallen behind with payments to them.

 

This letter makes it look as if I've not been paying them and that I'm in serious arrears - which is factually incorrect.

 

To me it seems like yet another form of psychological harassment/intimidation from DLC but would they (yet again) use the "it's an automated letter" excuse? I just want to know if anyone has come across this tactic before from a DCA and what it all means.

 

I'd appreciate guidance on this i.e. why have they sent me this and what should I do?

 

Thanks,

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

14:07………………Thanks for the reply silverfox.

 

I'd be okay if it was a statement that showed an opening balance and closing balance, or just a statement that showed the balance. This however implies that I'm hugely in arrears with DLC which I'm not - and the fact that they've enclosed the OFT leaflet backs this up.

 

I just need to make sure that it's not a precursor to something else they're about to send me. If it's not and this is just a standard tactic or practice then fine - but I just don't trust this lot as they've been shown up as liars many times already.

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

 

Instead of starting a new thread shame M1sterP didn't post this up on this thread yesterday afternoon, it appears relative to the debate that continued throught the evening

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...