Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Ecker
      Approaching Pension Maturity - have debts to DCA's - do i have to tell them?

      By Ecker · Posted

      sorry I have been confused by Statute Barred meaning. I thought with Statute Barred the debt cannot be chased 6 years after you have stopped paying.  Originally I set up a payment arrangement with all the companies around 2008 when things went horribly wrong. At that time the payment arrangement was with the original creditors.  I still have one of the original creditors who I pay each month (Cap1). I thought that if you make a payment arrangement you have to stick to that situation throughout. Also, MDR (Moorcroft) have been taking a monthly payment on behalf of M & S Bank for about 5 years. When I sent MDR a CCA request I got a copy of the original agreement sent to me directly by M & S Bank about 5 weeks after my CCA request. Sorry for my ignorance but would you suggest I stop paying all including Cap1 who are the original creditor? TIA
    • Moomoo11
      Lowell/Overdales Claimform - old Cap1 Debt

      By Moomoo11 · Posted

      London1971 without divulging too much into his mental health he has issues regarding anything to do with government and so is it ok to fill the forms provided and what do I put on there  thanks  
    • catscratch
      Email received from 'Legal' company giving two days to respond.

      By catscratch · Posted

      Dear all, I am hoping for some advice/guidance on this matter. I received a LoC dated 12/04/24 and replied to this on the 2/05/24 disputing claim with the following reasons: 1: [Inadequate Affordability Assessment]: I contend that your institution failed to conduct a thorough assessment of my financial circumstances prior to approving the loan. As a result, the loan amount and repayment terms were not suitable for my income and financial situation. 2: [Unsustainable Repayments]: The repayment schedule imposed by the loan agreement placed an undue burden on my finances, making it impossible for me to meet my other financial obligations without experiencing significant hardship. 3: [Lack of Transparency]: Your institution did not adequately disclose the risks associated with the loan, including any potential increases in interest rates or fees over the loan term. I also added the following: Under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regulations, lenders have a legal obligation to conduct thorough affordability assessments and ensure that loan agreements are suitable for borrowers' circumstances. I hereby request that your institution: 1: Conduct a full investigation into my claim of irresponsible lending. 2: Provide me with copies of all documentation related to the loan application and approval process, including affordability assessments, credit checks, and correspondence. 3: Cease all collection activities related to the loan until this matter is resolved. Yesterday i received the attached reply via email and it included: 1: The Original Loan agreement 2: An account statement 3: A copy of a default notice letter. The email included a link for a direct debit set up page where you enter their reference and your bank account details (looks like a standard D/D set up page) but there is nothing to indicate the amount of the D/D that I might be agreeing to. I also think two days response time is not long enough to appropriately reply. Any thoughts appreciated   Email-compressed.pdf
    • London1971
      Lowell/Overdales Claimform - old Cap1 Debt

      By London1971 · Posted

      Easy to set one up on Gov.uk , search on Google.
    • Moomoo11
      Lowell/Overdales Claimform - old Cap1 Debt

      By Moomoo11 · Posted

      Hi London  he doesn’t have government gateway. Should we do it via post?

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

WCC Council Tax Arrears - Bristow & Sutor attending doorstep!

MagicTongue
 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4917 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

hallowitch

hallowitch

Posted
Posted

My partner - it's her car, been S.O.R.N for months now [No ta, no MOT, etc] but she has now moved the car due to this anyway.

 

this debt does not belong to your partner there is no joint liability for this debt as the debt was your debt before you met her

they cant levy her car for your debt

 

A letter of complaint should be sent asking them to remove the levy fee and any other fees associated with the levy (van fee that will defo be added to your account)send letters recored delivery to the revenues dep of your council and B&S I would also send it by e-mail

 

because the levy is unlawful the only fees that can be charged on this account are1st&2nd visit fees (as long as you don't let them into to your home)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tingy

Tingy

Posted
Posted
My partner - it's her car, been S.O.R.N for months now [No ta, no MOT, etc] but she has now moved the car due to this anyway.

 

this debt does not belong to your partner there is no joint liability for this debt as the debt was your debt before you met her

they cant levy her car for your debt

 

A letter of complaint should be sent asking them to remove the levy fee and any other fees associated with the levy (van fee that will defo be added to your account)send letters recored delivery to the revenues dep of your council and B&S I would also send it by e-mail

 

because the levy is unlawful the only fees that can be charged on this account are1st&2nd visit fees (as long as you don't let them into to your home)

 

 

HW - I totally agree with you, BUT i think the OP will get better results going via the CEO oof WCC than trying to pursue anything through the bailiffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
darkandverystormy

darkandverystormy

Posted
Posted (edited)

Brutor and Suitor as I call them, are a firm of Morons based in Worcesthire, they have recently started appearing around the country working for Councils mostly and have managed to secure Traffic and Council Tax contracts, hence the appearance on your property. are a very rude bunch of idiots who go around harassing people for money,( DEMANDING MONEY BY MENACE) which includes some big added on fees to the original debt.

 

I am a litigator and I have had complaints from clients of mine in Wiltshire who was prevented from taking her kids to school one as young as 4, by clamping her car. These idiots appeared on her doorstep at 7am , with four kids getting ready for school, her partner was a yellow bellied fool, and they harassed even when she was calling friends and relatives to scrape the money together to pay them. They shouted rude comments for all to hear, they banged on her door constantly until she opened it, refused to leave the property.

 

Unfortunately I could not attend to help her out as I was in Bristol with another client, and they are there as well, sending him nasty letters. I reply vert vitriolically, especially if they call my private home line, it's ex directory. These morons are nasty people , and we as a growing group of fighters on sites like this have to stand up and fight these nasty people and have the upper hand at all times. One of the things I compliment you for is "NOT TO LET THEM INSIDE THE HOUSE AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON" , even if they collapsed outside your house call them a taxi or the ambulance.

 

I then made a complaint on behalf of my client and all I got was text message back stating that they had received a complaint.

 

The other thing that is annoying is that the "so called" Governing bodies " DO NOT WANT TO KNOW". So I think that there must be some collusion between these so called governing bodies as the firms are built around thugs, who harass VULNERABLE PEOPLE.

 

 

There is a Law based on a decision set in the High Court , and it is the Law of Tort. It is quoted on this website, and I use it in letters. basically it tells anyone you wish not to harass you by visiting/ calling/ writing letters etc WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION, and revokes the permission to come on your property . It is given to people like the postman, milkman etc, people who want to have, and the ones you wish not to have, you use this law, and they have to abide by it.

 

I am buying a book offered here online as I want the information against these idiots so I can fight them on behalf of my clients.

 

I hope that I have helped you in someway to sort the problem.

Edited by darkandverystormy
typing mistakes and a few more points to leave.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Tingy

Tingy

Posted
Posted
Bruter and Suitor are a firm of Morons based in Worcesthire, they have recently started appearing around the country working for Councils mostly and have managed to secure Traffic and Council Tax contracts, hence the appearance on your property. as I call them are a very rude bunch of idiots who go around harassing people for money,9 DEMANDING MONEY BY MENACE) which includes some big added on fees to the original debt. I am a litigator and I have had complaints from a client of mine in Wiltshire who was prevented from taking her kids to school one as young as 4 because these idiots appeared on her doorstep at &am , with four kids getting ready for school, her partner was a yellow bellied fool, and they harassed even when she was calling friends and relatives to scrape the money together to pay them.

 

I then made a complaint on behalf of my client and all I got was text message back stating that they had received a complaint.

 

The other thing that is annoying is that the "so called" Governing bodies " DO NOT WANT TO KNOW". So I think that there must be some collusion between these so called governing bodies as the firms are built around thugs, who harass VULNERABLE PEOPLE.

 

 

There is a Law based on a decision set in the High Court , and it is the Law of Tort. It is quoted on this website, and I use it in letters. basically it tells anyone you wish not to harass you by visiting/ calling/ writing letters etc WITHOUT YOUR PERMISSION, and revokes the permission to come on your property . It is given to people like the postman, milkman etc, people who want to have, and the ones you wish not to have, you use this law, and they have to abide by it.

 

I am buying a book offered here online as I want the information against these idiots so I can fight them on behalf of my clients.

 

I hope that I have helped you in someway to sort the problem.

 

That's an interesting post. I thought the rule of tort you refer to just worked as tort of trespass, but from what you say it goes a lot further than this. I'll look it up, thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites
MagicTongue

MagicTongue

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Hi MT,

Thanks for your responses.

 

I would advise that you contatct Trish Haines, the Chief Executive of WCC at [email protected] (link showing as worcesters hire on my computer, but if you click it, it does come out right) and tell her exactly what's been going on, how distraught your children were, especially after the trauma of being moved to emergency accommodation etc... and remind her that the council are vicariously liable with the bailiffs. Ask under the circumstances, and given that you are paying the council direct, if they would please consider recalling the debt and call off the bailiffs as it is causinge extreme distress to you and your children.

 

Normally when you e-mail the CEO you get some kind of response VERY quickly, so give them 2 days maximum, and if they haven't responded send another one with a copy of this one, and stating how disappointed you are that nothing has happened. Hopefully that will be unnecessary.

 

Let us know what happens.

 

T

 

Email sent, reply received:

 

Dear Mr ******

Thank you for your e-mail addressed to the Trish Haines, Chief Executive of Worcestershire County Council.

However Council Taxes are dealt with by Worcester City Council and I have therefore forwarded your e-mail on for attention.

Julie Descher

PA to the Chief Executive

Worcestershire County Council

Link to post
Share on other sites
darkandverystormy

darkandverystormy

Posted
Posted

TAKE VERY CAREFUL NOTE OF THIS WARNING :

1. This letter is sent to you to avoid any “miscommunication” and to give an unequivocal statement of intent.

 

2. This letter does not acknowledge and never ever will acknowledge any debt owed to you or your affiliates, agents, owners or otherwise.

 

3. I wrote to the company on several occasions explaining that I had no wish to pay towards a debt that was been perused by your company

 

4. I am now of the view that your actions are of pure harassment and in breach of CPUTR 2008 in line with the Office Of Fair Tradings guidance on debt collection.

 

5. The same guidance states it is unfair to pursue a payment after a debtor has already stated they will not be paying. I am informing you once again, that even if the debt were mine, I will not pay it, and will not reply to any FURTHER communications in anyway shape or form.

 

6. I am sure you are also aware of the provisions of the Protection from Harassment Act, which makes it an offence to harass a person with a demand for payment, or concerting with others to do the same. Whilst the Act provides relief, it is available only where it is permissible in law to take the offending action (which, as pointed out, it is not lawful as it is statute barred), as well as that action being unreasonable.

 

7. You have stated that they would send a debt collector to my address. I refer again to the OFT guidance on this matter, specifically at

Para: 2.12d (entering a property when not invited),

Para: 2.12e (failure to leave a property when asked to do so) and

Para: 2.12f (visiting or threatening to visit without prior permission when the debt is disputed).

 

8. Furthermore, you are reminded as to the common law provision which allows presumed consent of visiting without prior agreement (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 QB 396).

 

As such, I am notifying you that I do not, and will never ever give consent to you or your agents etc or employees to enter on to my property.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not wish for any person acting in any manner relating to this debt to visit my property nor do I wish to make any appointments.

 

Any person who visits my property in relation to this alleged debt shall be immediately evicted forcibly, using whatever method is reasonable and necessary and available, and I shall have no fear of defending my property in whatever way I see fit.

 

Furthermore, damages shall be sought under the Tort of Trespass.

 

I trust the above is perfectly clear and I now expect you to stop all contact with me in any way shape or form.

 

I hope this letter makes my position COMPLETELY clear, as I will not reply to any further correspondence from yours or any other company through whom you may try to correspond with me, including trying to enforce judgements through a county court which will cost them £60.00 before anything further is actioned, and they will not do it incase they loose, which that is a high chance of it happening.

 

Hope that helps Tingy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ploddertom

ploddertom

Posted
Posted

 

She is the CEO's PA - just phoned them to make sure it's the right prson!

 

If you get no joy, send the letter above.

 

Must get my eyes tested thought that said ............. the right prison!

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
seanamarts

seanamarts

Posted
Posted

Fraid to say that bailiffs can not be deemed as trespassers

The Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992, section 43 (subsection 7)

(7) A distress shall not be deemed unlawful on account of any defect or want of form in the liability order, and no person making a distress shall be deemed a trespasser on that account; and no person making a distress shall be deemed a trespasser from the beginning on account of any subsequent irregularity in making the distress, but a person sustaining special damage by reason of the subsequent irregularity may recover full satisfaction for the special damage (and no more) by proceedings in trespass or otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...