Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I apologise if I was being unclear. Where it currently stands is that they will have it repair, placing scaffolding in our garden for 5 days. They have moved fast, but we will still have to postpone our contractors, meaning, we won't necessarily have the work done in time for the wedding and therefore will incur additional expenses for either a marquee or a wedding venue. They are vehemently against having any kind of liability in any regard but continue repeating that they are legally entitled to use our garden for their repairs (I believe this is true unless the work can be carried out using a cherry picker). The neighbour seems either indifferent or oblivious to the fact they can't reach all of the side of the roof from the space where they can place the scaffolding. They have asked their roofer of choice about using a cherry picker but the roofer has said it wasn't possible. It's not clear whether the roofer doesn't want to use a cherry picker or whether there is an issue with it. They have told us it is a problem that we are installing a gazebo as it will prevent them to access their roof from our garden in the future?!?  
    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
  • 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 
        • 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

Toothfairy Finance/NDR/Marshall Hoare queries **


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4136 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,

 

I've been following this site for a while as I'm currently going through a bit of financial realignment in my life. I liked the look of it because most the responses on Money Saving Expert seemed to be along the lines of "I told you so - you deal with it!", whereas these actually seemed informed and not judgemental.

 

Foolishly I had nine payday loans and the continual rolling, reloaning etc all got a bit too much for me - a lesson lived is a lesson learnt and all that. I contacted Debt Line (I should have used CCCS in hindsight) who arranged my payment plan with the creditors - currently it all seems to be going to plan with the creditors (some of who I expected real nastiness from) except for Toothfairy Finance.

 

I took a loan of £200 for a month (£276 with interest) and defaulted - the debt has now been upped to £760 since they "passed it on" to Northern Debt Recovery. After a bit of research on here and other sites I continued to question every email they sent me and they continue to tell me that all their charges are legal and proportionate and that anything that I have read including the OFT are not accurate and should not be trusted. I copied the OFT in my final email response and surprisingly I've had nothing from them.

 

I also asked in my last email (probably foolishly) what their involvement with Marshall Hoare was - no response about that but then coincidentally Marshall Hoare began to leave me voicemails and threats of "fast tracking a CCJ". I did top this off with what their involvement was with a director with firearms convictions was - apparently that's not true either though the internet says otherwise. The final straw came when one of the multiple voicemails said that "because we can't reach a conclusion via email perhaps you'd like to phone us" - no chance.

 

Basically I would assume I'm looking at another £200 on top of this current debt as no doubt NDR will "pass" it on to Marshall Hoare - for the time being I'm playing hardball by refusing to deal with them via phone and keeping the OFT and Credit Direct in the loop, it seems Debt Line only want to deal with them when a final figure is reached and don't look to be sorting that themselves (that seems like a bit of a waste of money too!) - what I'd like to know is, does anyone know of anyone actually being taken to court by any of the above and has anyone fought to pay the actual debt and not the make believe one they've instilled against rules set by the OFT?

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi, I have been to court with mixed results, but not with NDR / Marshall Hoare. Courts usually find if you have been fair and tried to negotiate repaying the debt you can get away with the loan and one months interest. My advice woul dbe stick to your guns, keep emailing and progress the complaint as far as you can, if they keep ignoring you, you can always forward to the FOS after 8 weeks......

PLEASE HELP TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING Every pound donated to this site helps us to keep on helping others. Click Here to Donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting Marshall Hoare used to be Toothfairy Finance Cheque Cashing Ltd.....so a loan company are also a bailiff firm too !!

 

MARSHALL HOARES BALIFFS LTD

65 NEW CAVENDISH STREET

LONDON

W1G 7LS

Company No. 06871092

 

 

spacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifStatus: Active

Date of Incorporation: 06/04/2009

 

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

Company Type: Private Limited Company

Nature of Business (SIC(03)):

7499 - Non-trading company

Accounting Reference Date: 30/04

Last Accounts Made Up To: 30/04/2010 (DORMANT)

Next Accounts Due: 31/01/2012

Last Return Made Up To: 06/04/2011

Next Return Due: 04/05/2012

Last Members List: 06/04/2010

Previous Names:Date of changePrevious Name08/02/2011TOOTHFAIRY FINANCE (CHEQUE CASHING ) LIMITED

Edited by 42man
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see this Marshall Hoare name on their credit licence, nor Northern Debt Recovery ??? and CIM Technologies's accounts are overdue !! I suggest in line with the OFT's ruling against this company, you drop them a line (the OFT that is !!) Are you able to record the calls by any chance ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick update on this.

 

Had one response from Marshall Hoare (they didn't include the OFT in their email response funnily)

 

Dear xxxxxxxx,

 

Thank you for your email.

 

Please refer to the terms and conditions you legally obliged yourself to when you took the loan out with our client Toothfairy Finance.

 

The charges of £350 are in accordance with all current legislation and the OFT guidelines.

 

Please stop attempting to draw focus away from your outstanding debt and repayment of it by bringing up issues to try to avoid the issue.

 

We are simply interested in arranging repayment of this loan you took for an agreed period of 28 days that has now been outstanding for 2 months.

 

You currently owe £760 and this amount is going to increase with the application of interest, as per the terms and conditions you agreed to upon taking the loan. All other charges and actions are in proportion with the those same terms and conditions.

 

We look forward to hearing from you with regards to repayment.

 

Kind regards,

 

Yours Faithfully

 

Door Collections

 

Then I received a phone call from one of their agents who called me a "cliche, just trying to get out of paying" - seems funny that all my other creditors accepted my debt management plan and didn't nearly triple their charges in the process.

 

After a ten minute slanging match I said fine, take this to court to which she responded "you realise we are like a multi million dollar company and we have lawyers who know about these sorts of things" - You can't afford to spell check your letters or actually print on legitimate letter heads though?

 

So after I told them deal with Debt Line or take this to court, they said they'll take it to court! What's the bet they don't and I have the same conversation tomorrow?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I regret not recording that to be totally honest, I may actually bait them tomorrow (though I'm sure they'll be calling me a million times anyway) and do it.

 

Working nights tomorrow, so plenty of time to ring the OFT and FOS etc. What's the odds on these crooks actually pursuing a day in court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another breach of the OFT guidelines by this company who have already had a rap from them....make sure you email the OFT

 

2.4 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

a. falsely implying or claiming authority, for example, claiming to work on

instructions from the courts, claiming to be bailiffs or, in Scotland,

sheriff officers or messenger-at-arms

 

c. using more than one debt collection business at the same time

resulting in repetitive and/or frequent contact by different parties

 

e. not informing the debtor when their case has been passed on to a

different debt collector

Link to post
Share on other sites

A nest of vipers.....they are all based in the same building and are the same company....but of course they won't tell you this, it is an attempt to frighten you to the extreme...they have simply changed the name of their company

 

MARSHALL HOARES BALIFFS LTD

65 NEW CAVENDISH STREET

LONDON

W1G 7LS

Up until February 2011 they were called this - TOOTHFAIRY FINANCE (CHEQUE CASHING ) LIMITED

 

CIM TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED

65 NEW CAVENDISH STREET

LONDON

W1G 7LS

 

Here's a good one......Northern Debt Recovery are supposed to be a dormant company !! (The OFT will be VERY interested in this !!!)

 

NORTHERN DEBT RECOVERY LIMITED

65 NEW CAVENDISH STREET

LONDON

W1G 7LS

Company No. 06956396

 

spacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifspacer.gifStatus: Active

Date of Incorporation: 08/07/2009

 

Country of Origin: United Kingdom

Company Type: Private Limited Company

Nature of Business (SIC(03)):

7487 - Other business activities

Accounting Reference Date: 31/07

Last Accounts Made Up To: 31/07/2010 (DORMANT)

Next Accounts Due: 30/04/2012

Last Return Made Up To: 08/07/2010

Next Return Due: 05/08/201

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting! I'm going to call the OFT in a moment.

 

I've just had an email from NDR:

 

Dear xxxxxxxxx

 

Re loan ref: xxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

You have not responded to our request to come to a pragmatic arrangement with you to pay of your outstanding debt with our client ToothFairy Finance Ltd trading as ToothFairy Pay Day Loan. By ignoring our attempts to contact you and not coming to a reasonable arrangement to settle this debt YOU WILL:

 

1. Incur further charges

2. Suffer further adverse Credit

3. Hinder your defence should this escalate to County Court.

4. Leave us no option but to send out Recovery Agents to all addresses we have on file.

 

Once agents visit it will be very difficult to discount the amount you owe. It is better to make contact with us and set up a reasonable arrangement rather than allow this to escalate.

 

You currently owe:

Loan and Interest GBP 380

[chargeslis]

Repayments todate GBP 0

Total GBP 760

 

This can be reduced but you MUST contact us within 3 days. Your file has been sent to Bailiffs and our ground agents to prepare for Court action and door visits. We look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

DEBT MANAGER - Greg Campbell

NORTHERN DEBT RECOVERY

0843 381 0843

 

Will they actually take this to court? I've already emailed the OFT and Credit Direct (who stated that there needs to be a differentiation between "ground collectors" and bailiffs which helps in my favour).

 

To be honest, I'd rather go to court as I've repeatedly told them as they'll have to explain the charges to the court and even then the court would set a reasonable repayment... I'd hope!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic....I love this line - "3. Hinder your defence should this escalate to county courtlink3.gif." - this is particularly misleading as they do not know what any potential defence would be....also the line which says "2. Suffer further adverse Credit" - (this is not a word that OFT would approve of in any correspondence....

- the OFT will come down on them for this for sure....coupled with the fact that Northern Debt Recovery according to companies house are supposed to be a DORMANT company.....The OFT will love this....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Northern Debt Recovery do not have an OFT Licence either -

 

1. CIM Technologies Limited shall not use any trading name which is not

specified in its consumer credit licence.

 

Application / Licence Details

 

 

 

Licence Number:0615666

Licence Status:Current

 

Current Applicant / Licensee:

 

Business NameCompany Registration NumberCim Technologies Limited06144500

 

Licence Notes:

 

EvtStageOpen DateNotes1Requirements Imposed27/10/2010

 

Categories:

 

Consumer credit Credit brokerage Debt collecting

 

Right To Canvass Off Trade Premises:Yes

 

 

Trading Name(s) (Current):

 

Toothfairy Finance http://www.toothfairyfinance.co.uk http://www.toothfairyfinance.com

 

Issued Date: 15-Apr-2008

Expiry Date: 14-Apr-2013

 

 

Legal Formation:

 

Body Corporate (incorporated inside UK)

 

Current Individuals that run the organisation:

 

NamePositionJonathan Weinstock Jordan Taylor

 

Nature of Business:

 

Credit Agreements/loans (not linked)

 

Current Address(es):

 

Address TypeAddressCorrespondenceElizabeth House, 54-58, High Street, Edgware, Middlesex, HA8 7EJ, EnglandPrincipal Place Of BusinessElizabeth House, 54-58, High Street, Edgware, Middlesex, HA8 7EJ, England

 

 

 

 

4. CIM Technologies Limited shall instruct a suitably qualified party to

advise on, and administer as necessary, legal and regulatory

compliance.

For the purposes of these requirements 'CIM Technologies Limited' shall

include any company associated to CIM Technologies Limited, as defined by

s184 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and includes, but is not limited to,

Toothfairy Finance Limited, Northern Debt Recovery Limited and Toothfairy

Cheque Cashing Limited.

ANY FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE ABOVE REQUIREMENTS WILL

RENDER CIM TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED LIABLE TO FURTHER FORMAL

ACTION BY THE OFT. THIS COULD INCLUDE THE IMPOSITION OF

FINANCIAL PENALTIES PURSUANT TO SECTION 39A OF THE ACT AND/OR

THE REVOCATION OF CllM TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED'S CONSUMER CREDIT

LICENCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 32 OF THE ACT.

Ray Watson Director, Consumer Credit Group.

Authorised signatory on behalf of the OFT

CIM Technologies Ltd, 61 5666. 27 October 201 0

Page 2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just spoke to Credit Direct who are going to refer this to Trading Standards.

 

I discussed many of the points above as well as ones on the OFT website but they didn't really have any specific answers which is a bit down-heartening. They searched for Northern Debt Recovery and couldn't find it on their system but they did find NDR Investigations who's license lapsed in 2005 - they're not sure if they're one and the same.

 

General consensus is stick to your guns - they said if it goes to court and you an prove you're on a DMP the judge will basically class it as a waste of time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just sent another reply to NDR:

 

or your reference I have referred this case to Credit Direct who are passing this on to Trading Standards.

 

As it stands I will only resolve this case with you if you can remove the majority of your charges are they are unfounded (£150 for solicitors? We've not been to court yet... £200 for passing on to debt recovery... who are the same company?) and the remaining balance is paid via my Debt Line plan. I have requested that Debt Line contact you once again.

 

A response to the above would be much appreciated but I doubt I'll see one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another response.

 

 

Thank you for your email.

 

We will agree to remove the fees for you but the minimum we will accept as a payment plan from yourself is £75 per month.

 

If you go through your DMA we are not able to remove any of the fees.

 

We are not prepared to hold this file for much longer if we cannot come to an agreement then we will pass your file to a third party bailiff company unless we receive a payment from either yourself or your DMA within 3 business days.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

DEBT MANAGER – JACK ROGERS (43)

Link to post
Share on other sites

My response:

 

Jack,

 

How can the charges only be removed if I come to an agreement with you? As it stands I cannot afford to pay that back so I will only be able to go through the DMA.

 

Bailiffs can only be appointed if I default on an arrangement set by the judge should this go to court. I would be very careful in making the distinction between a ground recovery agent who has no power and a bailiff appointed by the courts.

 

Kyle

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is funny I thought Marshall Hoare were a bailiff company...!!! *sigh*

 

I think next time I should tell I thought it had already been passed on to Marshall Hoare and if they legally own the debt now, why are they still contacting me?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey 42man - if you have time can you have a read through this? Thank you!

 

Toothfairy Finance Limited, CIM Technologies Ltd (trading as Toothfairy Finance), as well as our collection agents Northern Debt Recovery are fully compliant with all necessary legislation.

 

A. Financial Services Authority:

 

FSA regulation is only required for secured loans. This is an unsecured loan covered by the Consumer Credit Act.

 

B. Consumer Credit License:

 

-Toothfairy Finance.is fully licensed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act by Office of Fair Trading. The Consumer Credit License number is 637426. The local trading standards office is Camden.

 

-CIM technologies Limited (trading as Toothfairy Finance) is fully licensed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act by the Office of Fair Trading. The Consumer Credit License number is 615666. The local trading standards office is Camden.

 

-Northern Debt Recovery is fully licensed in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act by Office of Fair Trading. Northern Debt Recoverys Consumer Credit License number is 631166-1. The local trading standards office is Camden.

 

In conclusion all actions will be fully complaint and all necessary licenses held.

 

We trust that this has alleviated any of your concerns relating to legal and procedural compliance.

 

We have noted your concern and it is imperative that you now work with us to repay the loan. Please contact us by close of play today to discuss this and repayment of overdue sums.

 

If we do not hear from you by close of business TODAY we will have no option but to take further action to recovery these sums:

 

PASS your file with ALL evidence to third party Recovery Agents and Solicitors

 

REGISTERyour defaults as per this loan agreement against your national credit file.

 

ADD such legal and recovery fees to your file as are required to close this matters.

 

We look forward to hearing from you today so as to achieve a speedy and cost effective resolution to this matter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No sooner had I posted that, I received another email.

 

Dear xxxx

 

Thank you for your email.

 

We would remove the extra fees as a gesture of goodwill if you paid yourself, if it went through your DMA we would not be prepared to remove the fees. We are not obliged to accept any offer they make us and we will not accept an offer of repayment of less than £75 per month from either themselves or yourself.

 

A bailiff company can be appointed which is what will happen and they will dispatch ground recovery agents who will attemp to discuss/ recover the amount owed . All actions comply with OFT Guidelines.

 

We urge you to reconsider your position on this matter.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

DEBT MANAGER – JACK ROGERS (43)

 

NORTHERN DEBT RECOVERY

 

0843 381 0843

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well found......interesting address which is connected to Tunbridge Wells and not the one registered with companies house !!! which claims this company is DORMANT

 

Application / Licence Details

 

 

 

Licence Number:0631166

Licence Status:Current

 

Current Applicant / Licensee:

 

Business NameCompany Registration NumberNorthern Debt Recovery Limited6956396

 

Licence Notes:

 

EvtStageOpen DateNotes1Requirements Imposed27/10/2010

 

Categories:

 

Consumer credit Credit brokerage Debt collecting

 

Right To Canvass Off Trade Premises:No

 

 

Trading Name(s) (Current):

 

http://Www.Fairyfunds.Co.Uk

 

Trading Name(s) (Historic):

 

Fairy Funds Www,fairyfunds.Com

 

Issued Date: 04-Nov-2010

Date Maintenance Payment Due: 03-Nov-2015

 

 

Legal Formation:

 

Body Corporate (incorporated inside UK)

 

Current Individuals that run the organisation:

 

NamePositionJonathan Weinstock Oliver Larholt

 

Nature of Business:

 

Debt Collection

 

Current Address(es):

 

Address TypeAddressPrincipal Place Of Business1A, Sheffield Road, Southborough, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, TN4 0PDRegistered Office1A, Sheffield Road, Southborough, Tunbridge Wells, Kent, TN4 0PD, UK

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...