Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • 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

Corgi Homecare


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4022 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 need to be careful how I answer your main question. I have never used CORGI HomePlan and would not recommend it to anyone, but I have no first hand knowledge of the actual service. I only know CORGI and believe me I know them.

 

CORGI HomePlan is the original CORGI. It always was and still is a private company. It is the same CORGI that ran the HSE gas safety scheme for the HSE before they got the elbow. I cannot speak personally about the service but I can say that they stole customer data and details of installers. The authorities do nothing about it despite the obvious confusion and distress it causes. They are worse than CORGI.

 

I would be interested to know what the half-price offer is. It has been £16.99 for many months. I know that because I get the same letters off people I know around the UK and they quoted £16.99 until last month when the price was slashed from £34.00 to £16.99 ? In other words they are pathological liars. It has been £16.99 for months therefore that is a trading standards issue that needs to be reported.

 

They make my skin crawl …

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

For the record (and you may all quote me) I have dug out details relating to published material on the issue of CORGI’s theft of data. I have checked my records (hardcopy magazines) but the information below is also published online at H&V News. Type HomeCare into their search box. What CORGI said is waffle and I will explain why. CSL by the way means CORGI Services Limited.

 

First of all HomeCare is now HomePlan because CORGI copied the same trademark as that owned by British Gas. It beggars belief that CORGI were stupid enough to register a trademark owned by a biggy like BG. CORGI surrendered their trademark and registered HomePlan. People that feed off other people are filthy parasites.

 

The licensing agreement below simply refers to CORGI allowing the crowd that run HomePlan (nee Green Installer and nee HomeCare) to have ‘legal access’ to the CSL database. Clever choice of words and H&V News were sucked in and blown out again.

 

I have no doubt that access to the CSL database is legal (CORGI obviously have full control over that) BUT what is ON the database is not legal. That is the issue.

 

CORGI (when they were the HSE currently approved body) gathered two lots of data completely separately. CORGI decided that most installed gas appliances had to be notified to them and made it a condition of registration. The HSE would not interfere when I asked. I refused because I knew CORGI would steal the data as they have done and still are doing. That was called Gas Work Notification (GWN). CORGI promised in writing (August 2008) that the data would not be used for other than official purposes.

 

Installation of boilers and other appliances was and still is by law required to be notified to building control. Installers can do that via a competent person scheme.

 

Completely separately, CORGI had the role of Competent Person Scheme manager (Gas) for the then Prescot Government. Under that scheme CORGI had a legal duty not to use the data for commercial gain as they are doing.

 

When CORGI gathered the mandatory GWN data they asked permission of installers to pass the same data to the local authority. They therefore have data for that.

 

The data on the CSL database has to be from one of those two or both sources. There is no other source. The data has therefore been stolen and continues to be stolen. The authorities do nothing. Perhaps they are corrupt ? Misconduct in public office ? We may never know.

 

Some may argue from what people have written above that CORGI are passing-off and using their former status. It is clear that they are confusing people. Those once upon a time holier-than-thou commercial cowboys.

 

Anything consumers can do to highlight this abuse may help vulnerable people.

 

QUOTE

 

Data misuse response

 

8 June 2011

 

Under a licensing agreement, licensees are able to use the CORGI brand name, and are given legal access to the CSL database.

 

CSL data should not be confused with Gas Work Notification data, which was used by one of our licensees for a pilot marketing exercise in March of this year. I can state unequivocally that this Gas Work Notification data is no longer being used by our licensees.

 

CSL would not knowingly allow its data to be used inappropriately and, as a precaution, we are currently in discussions with the ICO (Information Commissioner’s Office) for clarification.

 

We would also like to make it clear that CSL data is not given to us by boiler manufacturers or any other organisations operating within the plumbing and heating sector, and we would never allow CSL’s commercial activities to jeopardise installer businesses.

 

Caitriona Deakin.

 

CSL head of trading

 

Ms Deakin was responding to allegations suggesting that data was used inappropriately by one of its licensees to promote a CORGI HomeCare maintenance scheme.

 

END OF QUOTE

 

The new Gas Safe register abandoned the GWN scheme but they still run the Competent Person Scheme which I willing submit data to. They can be trusted 100%.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

You could not be more right, this lot are a shower and i would urge anyone considering joining not to, they are aggresive and have a customer services dept that couldn't spell the word service. They have hidden catch all phrases in their Ts&Cs, like being without heating for 4 days in mid winter being perfectly acceptable. The sub contractors they use appear to mirror their laissez faire attitude. not a good experience. look elsewhere you could not do any worse !!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just realising it was a big mistake to believe the the misleading advertising letterwhich states that " Corgi Homeplan covers Plumbing systems including storage tank, overflows, leaks, hot and cold waterpipes. As a single pensioner I paid £239 up front for what I thought would be peace of mind for the year. When I developed a leak from the overflow of the cold water tank I was told that I should call a plumber, as it was not covered. My boiler is just a couple of years old, so it's unlikely to go wrong, so I must have been a real fool to be taken in by this company.

Of course it's all in the small print which you only get when you've paid and they send the terms and conditions, which are 2 whole pages of exclusions in minute print. It seems to include everything that's likely to go wrong. I wish I'd taken out a monthly plan, then at least I could have cancelled it when I found out it was such a con, and designed to mislead the gullible. What a gullible idiot I am!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

From my very recent experience I would suggest that anybody thinking about gettign thsi cover reconsider being covered by the CORGI homeplan and or READ the terms and conditions very very carefully.

I have been paying them £16.99 - £19.99 a month for approx 2.5 years. In January my boilers pressure started go up and down like a fiddlers elbow.

Called them out only to be told that my boiler was not installed correctly and that I am therefore not covered.

 

Now my boiler was installed by a corgi registered plumber, I have the building regulation certificate stating that it complies. Yet apparently I am at fault for believing that this mean my boiler is correctly installed, EVEN when CORGI Homeplan, send an engineer out in June 2012 to service it and say that the boiler is fine and workinb very very well.

 

I am very very upset and annoyed that they are quite happy to take your money over a period, but as per the terms "If the fault is deemed to have been in existance before the plan was taken out, then any repair is not covered".

 

I believe that I did due diligence in getting the boiler installed by, at the time, a CORGI registered engineer. I have done due dligience in ensuring I have cover and regualr maintances to keep it running + have cover for those times faults occur.

 

I believe that if they have this term, they must show a duty of care and or due diligence in inspecting the said boiler prior to accepting any money.

 

So in a nutshell, it may sound a good deal, but in reality could end up costing you more in the long term. I am already taking this situation up with GAS Safe and will also be approaching the FSA (as this is effectively insurance), to try and re-coup some of my £400-£500 I have spent out for nothing

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have had a Corgi plan for several years and to be fair they did assist when my boiler broke down - it was due to sludge (from which ensued a battle with British Gas over the fact they didn’t flush it when they installed it), anyway Corgi did cover the 3 or more visits to the point they realised it was due to sludge. They have also 'serviced' my boiler every year - although i have still yet to receive one piece of documentation toconfirm they have ever been.

 

So when they contacted me last year to upgrade to drainage cover for an additional £2 i did, mainly for 2 reasons which they stated on their website (and still do) and email to me - a) includes unblocking your WC and all other appliances regardless of how many bathrooms you have, and b) UK based 24/7 CORGI Hotline with emergency response times normally within 2 hours.

 

So, i called them yesterday (Saturday) to report a blocked WC. I was advised that they would call me back to arrange a visit – oh, and that they would be charging me a £50 callout fee.

 

26 hours later, after changing plans so I could be at home to have this fixed, I still had not heard from them, so I called them back (it's now Sunday).

 

I spoke to ‘Joe’ who asks if I have more than one WC (a question NOT asked of me yesterday) and when I confirm that I have he says that they do not provide drainage cover on a weekend.

 

I quote 2 points from their marketing – a) includes unblocking your WC and all other appliances regardless of how many bathrooms you have, and b) UK based24/7 CORGI Hotlinewith emergency response times normally within 2 hours. Both of which were KEY in my purchasing of this policy in the first place.

He continued to state that as I have more than 1 WC they do not provide cover on a weekend.

 

In my opinion this is clearly in breach of what they sold me and I am incredibly angry that they have mis-lead me in this way. I have been a customer for years and spent a significant monthly sum on cover that they just provide or change on a whim, and spent a whole Saturday waiting for them to call and attend.

 

AVOID THESE PEOPLE. I am now investigating alternative drainage cover and have reported them to the ASA.

 

I will wait and see if they might decide to cover me tomorrow, as it’s Monday and I’m probably not covered on a Monday either.

:mad2:

Edited by honeybee13
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Absolutely the WORST service product imaginable. They don't care about you or your difficulties. Today is our sixth day with no boiler, no CH, no hot water. Has anyone reported these people to Trading Standards? Where do I stand if I sack them as soon as they've fixed my boiler, they haven't fulfilled their obligation to me. They've dragged the Corgi name in the dirt as far as I'm concerned, Corgi was a quality product -I thought. Not any more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...