Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
    • As already mentioned freely available "credit scores" are fairly useless. All lenders have their own "credit scoring" system, that for obvious reasons they don't divulge. And they're "scored" differently to the freely available ones. As soon as they could, we've always encouraged our two children to use credit cards responsibly... Pay off in full, etc, to generate good history. It's paid off. At quite young ages, they have both obtained loans for cars, mortgage and their credit card limits are through the roof. Personally, I have shifted debt around a lot on credit cards (even financed a house purchase once at 0% 😉) and I've only ever been refused a credit card once, sorry twice by the same company, over many years. They must have something very different in their lending criteria. You're a tight one, Mr Branson.
  • 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
      • 160 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

Welcome Finance


Tingy
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4795 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

I'm quite used to dealing with debts and have had around £15000 written off this year. However read another post re Welscum this morning and it has made me think.

 

We ran into difficulties paying Welcome and were advised by them to voluntary terminate. I think (but have no paperwork at all as was burying head) they actually did a voluntary surrender as we are now being pursued by Raven Recoveries (I'm not aware of this company - I don't think they're part of Welcomes in house collections) for the balance.

 

After a myriad of phone calls over the last few weeks they've finally wrritten to me. My approach is always to ignore the first letter, then fire off a Prove It letter on receipt of a 2nd letter, then respond as necessary.

 

However, given the situation at Welcome at the moment, does anyone here have any advice on what I should do. Welcome are clearly in a mess and are not pursuing me through what I understand to be their normal channels. There has been no payment or acknowledgement for around 3 years and now this comes out of the blue.

 

What do you all think?

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Tingy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Postggi is the best person to help you on this, look for any other Welcome thread and he'll be on there, although with the title of this thread, I'm sure he will pcik it up soon enough.

Raven Recoveries eh??

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

Have no idea, but there is some talk that they might be welscum in disguise or MKRR, I think Postggi was trying to pin them down, is there a registered no. at all to check against companies house?

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

Raven Recoveries Company Number 04746414; CCL Licence Number 632091 based in Milton Keynes.

 

The letter refers to MKRR as their instructing clients. And the really scary bit....

 

"Failure to make contact with us within 7 days of this letter being issued (Dec 1st - 6 days ago leaving me 1 day!) will leave us no further option than to take alternative action to recover this balance."

 

I think that means if this letter doesn't scare you we'll try to think of something else!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Goggled Compello - this is what I found based in same place as Raven Recoveries! All part of TradePro Operations Ltd

 

 

Companies House Details

 

Companies House Number: 04746414

Incorporation Date: 28 Apr 2003

Latest set of accounts: Filed on: 27 Oct 10

Made up to: 31 Dec 09

Purchase a copy of these accounts for only £4.99

Sample accounts

 

Last company return showing the directors and ownership details: Filed on: 03 Jun 10

Made up to: 19 Apr 10

Purchase a copy of this company return for only £4.99

Sample return

 

63 documents available View other documents available on this company

Financial Year End31-12

 

 

Previous Company Names

 

TRADEPRO OPERATIONS LIMITEDChanged 26 Nov 2010

CAMEL OPERATIONS LIMITEDChanged 26 Jun 2003

PINCO 1937 LIMITEDChanged 08 May 2003

 

 

People connected with the Company

 

CHRISTOPHER SALESAppointment terminated as director on 05 Feb 2010 (Document)

CRAIG ALLANAppointment terminated as director on 27 Dec 2009 (Document)

CRAIG ALLANAppointment terminated as secretary on 27 Dec 2009 (Document)

MR JAMES ROY CLARKParticulars Changed as director on 11 Oct 2009 (Document)

CRAIG MCLEOD ALLANParticulars Changed as director on 11 Oct 2009 (Document)

MR JAMES ROY CLARKParticulars Changed as director on 09 Oct 2009 (Document)

CRAIG MCLEOD ALLANParticulars Changed as director on 09 Oct 2009 (Document)

CRAIG MCLEOD ALLANParticulars Changed as secretary on 09 Oct 2009 (Document)

CRAIG MCLEOD ALLANParticulars Changed as secretary on 09 Oct 2009 (Document)

CRAIG MCLEOD ALLANParticulars Changed as secretary on 09 Oct 2009 (Document)

CRAIG MCLEOD ALLANAppointed as director and secretary on 01 Feb 2009 (Document)

 

 

Charges / mortgages against this Company

 

CENTRIC SPV 1 LIMITEDCOMPOSITE GUARANTEE AND DEBENTURE - OUTSTANDING on 13 May 2010

BARCLAYS BANK PLCAN AMENDMENT AND RESTATEMENT AGREEMENT - OUTSTANDING on 11 Dec 2007

CS CAPITAL PARTNERS II, LPCOMPOSITE GUARANTEE AND DEBENTURE - OUTSTANDING on 08 Jul 2004

BARCLAYS BANK PLCCOMPOSITE GUARANTEE AND DEBENTURE - OUTSTANDING on 19 Dec 2003

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you still have a copy of the agreement? Welcome's paperwork in previous years was usually flawed. Might be worth sending an SAR to see what they've got.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ell - would you do that before sending a Prove It letter to Raven Recoveries. It woud seem they're one and the same anyway, so surely a Prove It letter should elicit an agreement or some form of concrete proof. If not then SAR them? Good thinking or not?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tingy was it a HP agreement you had?

 

If so was it arranged via a broker or did you arrange it with Welcome yourself?

 

You could do a CCA request on to raven recoveries but the information that Post has is i believe that Raven and MKRR are the same.

 

Have Raven written to you as people i have spoke to recentley had only been contacted by phone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tingy was it a HP agreement you had?

 

If so was it arranged via a broker or did you arrange it with Welcome yourself?

 

You could do a CCA request on to raven recoveries but the information that Post has is i believe that Raven and MKRR are the same.

 

Have Raven written to you as people i have spoke to recentley had only been contacted by phone.

 

I think you're right that Raven is a branch of MKRR or Capello Ltd -ie- Welcome. It's strange that the company number and name don't come up in a Companies Hose search though - I think they can trade legally using Capello or TradePro's CCL though? What does the C of N mean on the info I posted?

 

They have written to me this morning. I always ignore the first letter then send a Prove It as MY first letter to them. Often this letter alone stops them in their tracks. I was just tempted, like the person who posted after you, with Welcome being in such a mess to totally ignore everything (I know that's wrong) and see what happens, hence my asking my original question.

 

Thanks for your help

Tingy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I can see why you are asking the question Tingy. On the one hand the prove it letter may turn up something concrete and you may have to negotiate some sort of payment, or else they back off for lack of proper paperwork.

 

On the other hand - if you ignore and wait, they may go away anyhow.

 

What are they chasing for - is it a shortfall after volountary surrender?

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just doing a little digging, as I recognised TradePro.

So it seems that TradePro 'group' are also, 'Compello' and MKDP (Milton Keynes Debt Purchase) and yes they do have the same company number as Raven 04746414 ?

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

Just doing a little digging, as I recognised TradePro.

So it seems that TradePro 'group' are also, 'Compello' and MKDP (Milton Keynes Debt Purchase) and yes they do have the same company number as Raven 04746414 ?

 

I thought as much - thanks! BB do you know what the C of N means? I haven't a clue.

Also, if Raven are claiming that as their company number, should they legally be listed as a trading partner under Raven Recoveries if they're to do collection activities. I assume they're using the same CCL number as well. I know it's legal for subsidiaries to trade under one CCL, but should they actually be named as existing at companies house in order to do so? As far as I can see they're not listed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Ah well, if Muck Hall have got it you can bet it's unenforceable - to my knowledge they've never taken anyone to court. Prove it letter to them usually sees them off

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah well, if Muck Hall have got it you can bet it's unenforceable - to my knowledge they've never taken anyone to court. Prove it letter to them usually sees them off

 

 

Oh its deffo unenforceable, have known this for years, plus its got gap insurance which was never ever required so a bit of missselling too!

Today's post brought another letter from them with a reduced settlement offer, hahahaha

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...