Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This time you do need to reply to them with a snotty letter to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did try court. We will help this evening.  
    • Hi, I just wanted to update the post and ask some further advice  I sent the CCA and CPR request on the 14th May, to date I have had no reply to the CCA but I received a load of paperwork from the CPR request a few days ago. I need to file the defence today and from the information I have read the following seems to be what is required.  I would be grateful if some one could confirm suitability   Claim The claim is for the sum of £255.69 due by the Defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a PayPal account with an account reference of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)  The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 15-09-21, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £0.00. The Claimant claims the sum of £255.69   Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had financial dealings with PayPal  in the past but cannot recollect the account number referred to by the Claimant. 2. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor the Claimant refers to within its particulars of claim.  3. Paragraph 3 is noted. On the 14/5/2024 I requested information related to this claim by way of a Section 77 request, which was received and signed for by the claimant on 20/5/2024. As of today, the Claimant has failed to respond to this request, and therefore remains in default of the section 77 request and therefore unable to enforce any alleged agreement until its compliance. 4. Therefore it is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and: (b) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice Pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 5. Paypal (Europe) S.A.R.L is out of the juristriction of English Courts. 6. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed, or any relief.
    • Thanks @dx100ukI followed the advice given on here... then it went very quiet!  The company was creditfix I think then transferred to Knightsbridge (or the other way around) The scammer independent advisor was Roger Wallis-having checked his LinkedIn profile just this morning, it does look like he's still scamming vulnerable people... I know I was stupid for taking his advice, but i do wonder how many others he has done this to over a longer period of time (it came as a  massive shock to him when our IVA suddenly failed). Lowell have our current address (and phone numbers if the rejected calls over the past couple of days is anything to go by!) No point trying the SB because of the correspondence in 2019? Thanks
    • I have received the following letter from BW Legal today.  Also includes form if I admit the debt and wanting my income details.  Do I reply to this LETTER OF CLAIM please?  Looks like they are ready for court now??  Thank You BW Legal - Letter of Claim.pdf
    • According to Wikipedia - yeah, I know - the site is owned by Croydon Council. It's at least worth a try to contact the council and ask for a contact in The Colonnades. You could then lay it on thick about being a genuine customer and ask them to call their dogs off. It's got to be worth a try  https://www.croydon.gov.uk/contact-us/contact-us  
  • 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

Txtloan - Debt Collectors


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4717 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

Hi,

 

Has anyone dealt with their purported debt collection team?

 

I had been dealing with their in-house collections team and they have now indicated it has been passed over to debt collection.

 

I have offered to pay them £120 on an original loan of £100 but they are digging their heels in asking for £200. I guess the cost will only increase now they are passing it onto another debt collection company.

 

Has anyone else been through a similar process with this lot and I will not be a position to pay anything more than £120 otherwise they will be getting £1 a month for 300 months!

 

Cheers

 

W

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think it is the smartest move...I have also taken loans from them and if you ask politely then have always decreased amount that I have to pay back:roll:. To be honest if you try to the other way you will be haunted by this debt several years..Is that what you want:?:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your £120 offer is reasonable and I would be tempted to call their bluff. No dca has any power over you and you can tell them to get lost as well. Keep a copy of your correspondence just in case so you can prove you have been reasonable. A £1 per month offer is fair if that's all you can afford.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear David,

 

Thank you for the e-mail.

Your loan is about to be handed over to debt collection as today is its 186th day. We provide short term loans for 7 days only.

 

Above response after I offered a £120 settlment offer - they say the amount is still fixed at £200.

 

I can afford more than £1 a month that is for sure, but I would be offering that in protest to paying a figure which is 200% more than the original amount loaned. I figure that way, it would cost them more money in admin costs and it would not impact my lifestyle if I was paying £1 a month. I am quite happy to hand over £120 to clear the debt and I think both parties would be happy with that.

 

I have now sent the 'rejected offer' template letter but heard no response from yesterday. I wonder who is this debt collection they are passing it onto - my guess it will be a third party DCA.

 

They have not made life easy with their insistence to only take payments from my card number despite several requests for their bank details!

 

 

--

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Jamie,

 

Up the ante to £140 as a final offer then?

 

I am not too sure they are interested in any offers now, from the last reply they seem hell bent on passing to a DCA.

 

If it goes to a DCA will that spell bad news?

Link to post
Share on other sites

not bad news, just annoying mate. they will also up the bill again and you dont want to be fighting this into the new year because of £60.00. offer the £140.00 to close off the account, you just want rid of it, call them to offer it to a manager, if they have any sense they'll accept.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of an update. I got a response back from Txtloan saying their settlement figure would be £160 but this needs to be communicated via Fredricksons as this has now been passed onto them to deal.

 

They said once you have paid Fredricksons, they will then communicate to Txtloan who will then wipe off the debt.

 

Not too bad a figure and is less than what I was expecting they would request.

 

The question is now should I haggle with Freds for a lower settlement or should I just play ball and pay the £160?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Willo

 

If they have sold debt to Fredericksons they would probably bite your hand off for £140. They will think it is their lucky day having paid a fraction of this for the debt. If not sold I suspect they will still accept £140. Personally I would stand my ground. Already by doing this they are negotiating!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Guys,

 

I will send an e-mail to Freds in the next couple of days, but expect it is probably en-route to them as we speak. They ill probably take around 7 days to get in migrated on their system and assign an account manager etc.

 

I get the impression the debt has not been sold but Fredricksns are probaly actng as their designated debt collector. Not sure how the arrangement works but would hazard a guess its either fixed fee or they receive a percentage of the total repaid.

 

Have a good NY everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Freds have been quite good with me. They accepted £10 a month in a £200 debt, but said they would accept £140 if I paid in one hit. I may have some extra money coming at the end of January, so will offerr £100 to clear. They are keen to get whatever they can, so I reckon they'll go for this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fredericksons have a couple of 'solicitors for rent' who do their dirty work, Bryan Carter and Turnbull Rutherford - so watch out for 'soliciting' letters from those firms.

 

I suspect uncle Bryan will possibly try to chase if they don't get their money quick enough, but he is easy to see off.

 

Hopefully you can put this to bed at the end of January and stay clear of these 'payday' companies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my opinion is to stick with the original offer of loan plus interest. stick to your guns and as SG suggested, if this gets to Bryan Carter solicitors, come back on here for further advise.

 

i had a similar loan and paid back the original £100 plus interest. one of the guys on here helped me with the letter. check my bryan carter thread from june 2010.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Guys,

 

These two firms: Freds and Txtloan personify incompetence!

 

After receiving an update on the support interface with Txtloan that they had passed the debt to Freds and they would settle for £160. I waited until Freds got in touch and they said the debt figure was at £247 and a settlement of £160 was far too insignificant and £198 was lowest they could go. I then cited the e-mail received from txtloan about £160, in which the operator asked for a copy to be e-mailed to Freds.

 

Completed this and after two days of no response, I decided to give them a call. The operator this time, said he has a note on the system to say that Txtloan have to confirm with Freds that this is an offer they would be happy with!! I arugued the case, saying surely they should communicate all offers to their client and not the other way around, after all thats what they are paid for.

 

In the end I hung up, but emphasised that I thought it was both companies failing to admit responsibility. I dropped a note to Txtloan confirming the conversation today and that they needed to speak to Freds and surprise, surprise they said that Freds must confirm the offer to them.

 

You really couldn't make this stuff up. Any ideas how I can get through all this density from both sides and get the account settled??

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would wait it out. stick to your guns. Try and call Txt loan and demand to speak to a capable manager or higher position who can make desicions. explain the situation, keep calm and collected. see what they say... forget about freds if they cant collect the debt they'll just pass it back to txt loan...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi

 

I think you should tell them you are recording the conversation and offer them payment i have always been led to believe that firms that refuse a decent offer as this sounds to be your case you can take them to court and get the debt wiped good luck hope you get this resolved do not let them walk all over you seems they keep raising the price keep all the codependency you get and go seek legal advice or see your nearest CAB DO NOT PAY THEM

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think you are being completely unreasonable and outrageous. i have dealt with txtloan myself and they were extremely helpful when i had my card stolen and offered me to pay later at no interest. the default letter says your loan is 6 months overdue and you only want to offer them £10 extra in interest fees when the interest for the week is £10! thats just ridiculous. its your responsibility to make sure you can repay before you take out a loan. the fact that they are negotiatiing with you just shows that they care about their customers-something most other companies out there wouldnt even consider.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmm....

 

Do we have a txtloan worker in our midst??

 

S&@t happens love and it can't always be planned for.

"In this situation, you know what you have to do? Just keep swimming, swimming, swimming." Dory - Finding Nemo.:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

There will always be 'can't pay' and won't pay. It's life unfortunately. You can't legislate for it but banks etc do plan for it with interest rates etc. Payday loan companies know that the bulk of their customers have cruddy credit references because they have no other way of getting finance. They then choose to lend money at extortionate rates to ensure they do make a profit from those who do pay responsibly etc.

 

These companies are certainly not going to miss out, believe me!!

"In this situation, you know what you have to do? Just keep swimming, swimming, swimming." Dory - Finding Nemo.:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...