Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Russia’s economy has been cut off from the global financial system - but it is still growing. Why?View the full article
    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] 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 16-06-23, 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 the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. 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. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted 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 how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 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. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • 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

Co-Operative


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4746 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

 

First post and looking for advice on our local Co-Op.

 

We moved to our town about four years ago and in that time I would estimate we have been wrongly charged for Special Offer items somewhere between 60 - 100 times. It is something that other people have commented on also.

 

Given that most people probably never look at their bill, particularly pensioners, or cant be bothered to go back to the shop for a couple of pounds, this shop must be making tens of thousands of pounds overcharging people.

 

We have contacted the Co-Op head office on a couple of occasions, what more could we do? and is it something trading standards would be interested in?

 

thx

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you say "Special Offer" items are you referrring to items near their sell by/best before date that have been marked down in price? This sometimes happens to me in my local Co-Op, seemingly more by the ignorance/don't care attitude of the staff who fail to notice the reduction sticker and just scan the original bar code. Where I have picked up items such as these I watch the till display closely and challenge them if I am not getting the reduction I am expecting. I would suggest you do the same.

 

I don't know whether Trading Standards would be interested, perhaps you could try contacting them and seeing what they have to say. It seems to me quite likely that they would act if they were convinced the problem was endemic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi IainHL

 

No I am talking about two for a certain amount type thing. My wife was in the shop earlier, and bought a packet of Quavers crisps, meant to be half price at £1.84. When she went to pay at the till, they came up at £3.69, and when she queried it the assistant reduced them to the correct price. Since she has got home we have noticed she bought two packs of chicken breasts, meant to be two for £5, and she has been charged £3 each for them. It really is getting totally out of hand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

... and is it something trading standards would be interested in?

 

:wink:

 

Trading Standards do not so much as own the choice, to take no notice.

 

Section 19 of The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations insists that "It shall be the duty of every enforcement authority to enforce these Regulations" and there could hardly be a doubt that the misleading commercial practice in question "causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise", which is therefore a strict liability criminal offence.

 

It is not an acceptable excuse, to be careless. The Regulations require that the trader took, "all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of such an offence by himself or any person under his control."

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes its a trading standards issues. i work in a major supermarket and its impossible to have everything priced right 100% all the time. but in a small co op i wouldnt of thought they should have many pricing issues as you say they do. I would inform trading standards and air your concern. it might take a few more people raising their concern with pricing in the store because i once spoke to a memeber of trading standards and he said that because of wage cuts etc they will look at higher priority cases.

also make sure you check your reciepts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This happened to me the other day, in a local Tescos. The price label immediately below the goods offered a price of £1.65 or "Two for the price of one". Then I noticed a large advertisement above the shelves, clearly displayed: £1 EACH.

 

Wondering what would happen, I took an item to the till and said "Can I just have this for £1?"

 

"One pound sixty five, please" came the reply.

 

After a bit or an argument I got it for the £1, as advertised, with the manager trying to make out that this was some sort of special favour, with the extra paid from his own pocket.

 

Really?

 

... can't help but wonder to what extent this sort of "error" is deliberate. If in all honesty they are just too stupid to ensure that any advertised offer is already recorded on the database of prices before the public display of a special offer, there are kids at school, yet to take their O-levels who could show them how.

 

It's a matter of simple logistics, not rocket science.

 

:roll:

 

This is nonsense:

 

yes its a trading standards issues. i work in a major supermarket and its impossible to have everything priced right 100% all the time.

 

It is perfectly possible, all of the time, the same as it is perfectly possible to charge for the goods; one price on the shelves, the same at the till. Simple. They know how to do it when they want to.

Edited by perplexity
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough Zorba, that comes down to the till software not being in step with what's on the floor (well shelves, but you know what I mean!). I guess that would tend to make it a store management issue rather than a general staff incompetence one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

from working in two large leading supermarlets the pricing and offers will be updated on the tills/computers and then any changes must be done by staff. they will have some sort of list showing what will change and when.

so basically take the example of the chickens on the 2 for £x.xx offer. it will run from a certain date and then the store will be told it finishes on a certain date so they need to take the labels off saying the offer has finished at the right time.

so these issues will be 99% human error in store where the store hasnt follow there process for offers and price changes

Link to post
Share on other sites

so basically take the example of the chickens on the 2 for £x.xx offer. it will run from a certain date and then the store will be told it finishes on a certain date so they need to take the labels off saying the offer has finished at the right time.

so these issues will be 99% human error in store where the store hasnt follow there process for offers and price changes

 

... which is therefore short of "due diligence".

 

Were it a loss to the store, not the consumer, I fancy that they would and could be sure that the price at the till increases after the change to the price displayed, not before.

 

If it happened the other way around, that a price displayed is more than the price at the till I might be convinced that the error is inadvertent but in all honesty, I have yet to notice that it was.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With our local co op which to be fair I have to say since amalgamating with the other firm their prices have dropped greatly:-D

 

The problems I come across are at start of an offer and end of offer with the product not tallying with till due to either they have put the goods our too early re that offer or not took them off time enough at end of offer. If you are lucky to notice they of course refund you promptly but I must say my daughter who does the shops there is not as observant as me and resents the trips back and forth to correct it.

 

One well known irk is the meal deal, where you get brilliant deal of sarnie, drink and cake or crips for only £3.00. The offer on the various sarnies seems to occassionally change, yet you pick up a meal deal one and get charged as found out only yesterday seven quid roughly in total extra on the ones we bought.

 

Daughter got her refund but have to say I bet there is a huge ammount of cases where people do not realise and over pay, but have to say I suppose that is up to us to be more careful as I nag my daughter and for the likes of trading standards to do routine checks if enough issues occurr within similar time frame.

 

Cant beat their 3 quid meal deal though:lol: YUM

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think every major supermarket will have loads of pricing issues. it comes down to the fact these businesses are becoming a tougher environment to work in as a result of trying to stay cheap and affordable at a low cost

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...