Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. 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 as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. 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 £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • 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

A curious quickie


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4778 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 all

 

I've just received a missive from Credit Solutions Ltd, CR8 2PG following engagement with said enemy, which includes the line:

 

"Please be advised that our current Consumer Credit License number is 2520932"

 

The letter head states their Company Number is 2520932.

 

I am beginning to doubt my sanity, but seriously to whom do I report these clowns.

 

x

 

v

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I suspect that this is just example of slack administration and poor business practice that is in line with this company's inability to comply fully with OFT guidance and so on. We should probably pity them - they are so clearly out of their depth.

 

Their CCL number is actually 0300314. It expired in October last year, but there is a current application for renewal. The delay may be due to the OFT's inefficiency; on the other hand, as is to be hoped, they may be investigating whether these wretches are fit to hold a licence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again sillygirl

 

Just had a very interesting conversation with OFT; they weren't much interested in misrepresented CCL number because bandits have current (pending) licence, which I knew, but were interested in fake HMRC web-site address.

 

Am scanning and emailing all details to OFT.

 

So, over and out... to Credit Solutions Ltd.

 

Lots of love

 

vic

Edited by victoria_siempre
typos
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought, but if a company has their renewal of their CCL pending then theoretically, they may not be legally allowed to attempt collection activities on an account. Worth looking at and stating that no monies will be forwarded until written proof of legal entitlement to collect is received...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that was a hot topic a few months ago, something which should be chased up really, as if I didn't have an up to date TV licence I would be harassed non stop!

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

Hi vic

Don't know if you or anyone else has clicked on that link

I'm at work and running through a protected network system so plenty of antivirus/spyware etc so I opened it and it goes to another window that say's . . .

Pay Online

 

Unfortunately we are not able to process your payment on line at present. You can make payments through our automated service by contacting Credit solutions payment Hotline on 0800 542 0124. We apologise for any inconvenience caused.

 

As they've really bogged up this time I've kept screen shots just in case :wink:

Regards

R

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I asked them to wait whilst I got my Bank card :violin:

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

 

Information that may help if a CCA request is refused due to the lack of a signature . . http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?248863-Signature-demands-fight-back-possible-!&highlight=

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an item on Credit Today about the HRMC tendering - might be worth a read

 

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/news/news-item.cfm?news=2133

 

Sounds like this lot might be anticipating taking part in the feeding frenzy which will ensue......

 

Maybe they have bogged up after all . . bugga

But unless they've actually been approved it must still be wrong to use HMRC

Thanks for the link sg1

R

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I asked them to wait whilst I got my Bank card :violin:

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

 

Information that may help if a CCA request is refused due to the lack of a signature . . http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?248863-Signature-demands-fight-back-possible-!&highlight=

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

 

Halibutt: their current licence is valid though pending though they don't seem confident enough to quote it; perhaps they know something that we should.

 

Revenenet: I get:

"

hmrc.paythisaccount.com uses an invalid security certificate.

 

The certificate is only valid for www.hmrc.paythisaccount.com.

 

(Error code: ssl_error_bad_cert_domain)

"

 

and if you call 0800 542 0124

 

which I have done 192 times the response is curious as well. They do have other numbers but they don't like answering those.

 

You may detect that I am not fond of this company.

 

x

 

v

Edited by victoria_siempre
security
Link to post
Share on other sites

"You may detect that I am not fond of this company"

 

Really vic . . you hide it well :wink:

I got the Certificate warning too but went on and asked to open the link and that message appeared

I've just emailed HMRC's "phishing" section given them an outline of what's been found, below is part of the email . .

" It seems Credit Solutions have tendered to work for the HMRC but surely it must be wrong for them to use your "Name" in any communication until approved OR in matters that do not have anything to do with HMRC e.g. Consumer Debt Collection

 

I'm concerned about this situation as there's enough problem's with hard handed and some what misleading tactics used often used by Debt Collection Agencies as someone not knowing any better would see HMRS and panic, this in turn could lead them to paying money for a Debt that's not even theirs "

 

Lets see what, if anything HMRC come back with

R

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I asked them to wait whilst I got my Bank card :violin:

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

 

Information that may help if a CCA request is refused due to the lack of a signature . . http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?248863-Signature-demands-fight-back-possible-!&highlight=

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, what a coincidence R!

 

That wouldn't have been to [email protected] by any chance?

 

Mine was slightly differently phrased:

 

"I have received correspondence and telephone calls from the above company demanding money.

 

They have refused to provide a valid Consumer Credit Licence number (they cite 2520932) but do solicit payment via the above URL.

 

I am concerned that are misrepresenting themselves as agents of HMRC and seek your advice as to whether this misrepresentation is of interest to you.

 

cc xxx.MP etc"

 

As you so so rightly say, we'll see what this throws up.:-)

 

x

 

v

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha Ha snap

Mine had to be more general as I didn't actually receive the communication

Maybe just maybe this could put a bit of doubt into whether or not they're up to getting approved but being realistic :flypig:first

Time will tell eh vic

R

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I asked them to wait whilst I got my Bank card :violin:

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

 

Information that may help if a CCA request is refused due to the lack of a signature . . http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?248863-Signature-demands-fight-back-possible-!&highlight=

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys

 

A brief update:

 

The last missive from CSL, about which I have complained to OFT and HMRC as above, was dated 25 Jan.

 

Today I receive a notification of doorstepping from power2contact (part of same group) again with no CC licence on letter dated 24 Jan; usual guff.

 

Oh what a tangled web they weave; my main complaint is building up nicely.

 

x

 

v

Link to post
Share on other sites

Power2Contact are the in-house team for utility companies, and if you go back to the original creditor they can cut this lot out... they have NO POWER WHATSOEVER to come and visit, they then get local people to stick shirty notes through your door to contact them 'or else'.

 

Their shirty card was shoved through my door one Monday, when I received their letter on the Saturday, so no time whatsoever to contact before - very very suspect.

 

I did enjoy winding up their collector on the phone, I wouldn't recommend phoning but in this case I told her I had already spoken to the original company and she was onto a looser.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sillygirl

 

You're correct that they have a new block contract to utility collect but they are part of the same mob.

 

Registered Addresses:

Credit Solutions Ltd, Capella Court, Brighton Road, Purley, Surrey, CR8 2PG

Registered in England & Wales:02520932

 

Power 2 Contact Ltd., Capella Court, Brighton Road, Purley, Surrey, CR8 2PG

Registered in England & Wales:04791083

 

The Crucible Debt Purchase Company Ltd., Capella Court, Brighton Road, Purley, Surrey, CR8 2PG

Registered in England & Wales:05316613

 

Cougar Financial Services is a trading name of Credit Solutions Ltd.

 

 

Contact Us FoA: Select Credit Solutions Holdings Ltd Credit Solutions Ltd power2contact The Crucible Debt Purchase Company Name: Company: Address1: Address2: Town/City: County: Country: Postcode: Telephone: Mobile: Email: Question:

 

http://www2.crw.gov.uk/pr/Default.aspx#

 

xx

 

v

Edited by victoria_siempre
lnik
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got this back from HMRC . .

Thank you for contacting HM Revenue & Customs.

 

The email address you have emailed is only for reporting suspected

online fraud and cannot deal with this enquiry.

 

For more information please look at our website http://www.hmrc.gov.uk

however if you cannot find the relevant information and need to speak

with us please select the 'Contact us' option on the home page.

 

Oh well they obviously seem to care, back to their web site

R

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I asked them to wait whilst I got my Bank card :violin:

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

 

Information that may help if a CCA request is refused due to the lack of a signature . . http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?248863-Signature-demands-fight-back-possible-!&highlight=

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...