Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Firstly, I would like to thank everyone for their help in this matter. Since my last post I have received a reply from Plymouth Council Insurance Team concerning my wife’s accident (please see enclosed letter and photo of the offending Badminton post) which they deny any responsibility for the said accident. I feel that the Council is in breach of their statutory duties under the following acts: The Leisure Centre was negligent in its duty of care and therefore, in breach of the statutory duty owed under section 2 of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (the Act) to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all their employees, and others who might be affected by its undertaking, e.g. members of the public visiting the Leisure Centre to use the facilities. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 that requires employers to assess risks (including slip and trip risks) and, where necessary, take action to address them. The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) require the risk to people’s health and safety from equipment that is used at a Leisure Centre be prevented or controlled. I would like some advice to see if my assumptions are correct and my approach to obtaining satisfactory outcome to this matter are accurate. Many thanks   PLM23000150 - Copy Correspondence.pdf post docx.docx
    • Talking to them does not reset the time limit, although they will probably tell you it does, they'd be lying. Dumbdales are the in-house sols for Lowlife, just the next desk along. If Lowlifes were corresponding with you at your current address then Dumbdales know your address. However, knowing that they are lower than a snake's belly, you would be well advised to send them a letter, informing them of your current address and nothing else. Get 'proof of posting' which is free from the PO counter, don't sign it, simply type your name. That way then they have absolutely no excuse for attempting a back door CCJ.   P.S. Best course of action, IGNORE them, until or unless you get a claim form......you won't.
    • A 'signed for' Letter of Claim has been sent today so they have 14 days from tomorrow... Lets wait and see what happens but i suspect judging by their attitude they wont reply 
    • I am extremely apprehensive about burning our files.... I do not know why, so it is becoming an endless feedback loop. Scared to pull the trigger to speak in the desire not to mess up my file. 
    • Hi All, So brief outline. I have Natwest CC debt £8k last payment i made was 7th November 2018 Not a penny since. So coming up to the 6 year mark. Can't remember when i took out the  credit card would be a few years before everythign hit the fan. Moved house 2020 - updated NatWest as I still have a current account with them. Then Lowells took over from Moorcroft and were writing to me at my current address. I did get a family member to speak to them 3 years ago regarding the debt explained although it may be in my name I didn't rack it up then went contact again. 29th may received an email from overdales saying they were now managing the debt. I have not had any letter yet which i thought is odd?  Couple of questions 1. Does my family member speaking to lowell restart statute barred clock? 2. Do you think overdales aren't writing to me because they will back door CCJ to old address even though Lowells have contacted me at current address never at previous? ( have no proof though stupidly binned all letters  ) Should I write to them and confirm my address just incase? Does this restart statute barred clock? 3. what do you think best course of action is?   Any help/advice is appreciated I am aware they may ramp up the process now due to 7th December being the 6 year mark.   Many Thanks in advance! The threads on here have been super helpful to read.  
  • 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

Help with HFO and false debt


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4555 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,

 

Im posting to request some advice for those who have dealings with HFO (or similar debt collectors).

 

Last year I moved abroad and I found out today from family back in the UK that HFO have sent a letter to me start legal action on me for an unpaid barclaycard.

 

I have never defaulted on any payments and do not owe barclaycard any money and don't recognise the account and never even had a barclaycard, I am 100% certain its a case of fraud or mistaked identity.

 

I am very confused and stressed to how should I should proceed? This notice for legal action has come of the blue with no warning and reading others dealing with this company I am not sure that they will even listen to me. My fear is that I will have to spend a lot of money and take time off work to attend court dates to prove my case.

 

Has anyone else been in a similar situation or could advise?

 

Thanks

Ray.

Link to post
Share on other sites

firstly check your cra file

and

ring barclays compliance number given in other like threads

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask the debt collector to prove the debt is yours (letters on here) - if someone has taken out credit in your name then you will probably have to eport it to the Police as ID theft.

 

That should get the debt colelctor off your back but you would then need to make sure no other credit has been taken out in your name.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they wont go to court until you reply , but as DX has advised ring Barclays urgentley and advise barclays that you have never owned an account with them ,also contact the FOS and ICO and let them know also check your credit reference file, if HFO have entered a mark against you then your right to begin a libel action and sue for damages , but do not let this go , HFO are the bottom feeders in the debt collection market and their tactics are'nt pleasent this may include some phone harrassment if this happens to you or your family report it to the police do not contact \hfo by phone instruct them to contact you by mail only also make them aware you shall seek damages through court action and you are giving them the oppertunity to cease and desist on this matter forthwith if they refuse then they shall be held liable for all time spent on this and all costs such as travel etc...

Donkey and others will be on soon and they will advise

patrickq1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Are you able to get a hold of the letter you have received and scan it in with personal details removed? I am sure it is just a 'threatogram'

 

Ring Barclaycard on Barclaycard recoveries 0844 556 0066 and ask them what they know about this. I would not bother contacting HFO until you have more info from BC and NEVER speak to them on the phone, everything in writing

Please support CAG and they will support you.

donate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thanks for all the replies and suggestions, I will be following up with the prove it letter and contact Barclays as soon as possible.

 

I will post a scan of the letter soon as well (or write it up) as soon as I get home.

 

Thanks again all, I will do my best to keep this updated for others reference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@dadofholly and @DonkeyB

 

 

That was me, and it sounds like it is, the only thing is that it was Acktiv kapital then it turned out it wasn't a credit card, that was related to a current account that barclays ended up withdrawing the dogs off in the end as they admitted fault - I updated that thread as well now.

 

For the record, I did have a barclays current account and its always been in good standing order but not a credit card. I have since closed my barclays account (2 years ago)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - best not to speak to any like this unless you have a Truecall system and are using the recording for your own protection. Best to get everything in writing and to send everything recorded delivery so you can prove what you have sent to them.

 

Stick to letters only, hard to use recordings as evidence in court if needed. Letters are so much more concise and easy for a DJ to re-read etc...

Andrew

 

Escaped the DCA nightmare, now helping others start businesses

www.ukleakdetection.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stick to letters only, hard to use recordings as evidence in court if needed. Letters are so much more concise and easy for a DJ to re-read etc...

 

Recordings are perfectly useful. Judges don’t mind transcripts, usually.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Recordings are perfectly useful. Judges don’t mind transcripts, usually.

 

'Usually'....with the current DJ 'oddities' I'd not risk it. Nice thing with letters is it's single point of view, a phone conversation with a DCA naturally becomes adversarial (they want money, you want information) this could be a problem. A letter from a DCa with naughty references to out of date cases etc is IMHO much better!

 

Just my opinion though...

Andrew

 

Escaped the DCA nightmare, now helping others start businesses

www.ukleakdetection.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a call with the OC, not the debt owner, so it is not adversarial. It is for information. We know they seldom confirm facts in writing, which is annoying but true.

 

You are perfectly entitled to record your calls for your own reference. If a judge asks how you know something, simply say you recorded the call for your own purposes so you could be sure of the accuracy of the information. Most half-decent judges would accept a transcript, or if it’s something contentious, even listen to the recording. What would the oppo have to hide, after all? An admission of wrong-doing?

 

I know this because I have done it successfully myself (and I’m trained in the law of using such techniques, mainly from a journalistic point of view).

 

I agree, though, that I wouldn’t recommend it with most DCAs though, unless you’re thick skinned or they are really stupid, to the degree that they cannot write something off to admin error or rogue employee.

 

DCAs tend to tell fewer fibs in letters, because they form an audit trail, as you say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Usually'....with the current DJ 'oddities' I'd not risk it. Nice thing with letters is it's single point of view, a phone conversation with a DCA naturally becomes adversarial (they want money, you want information) this could be a problem. A letter from a DCa with naughty references to out of date cases etc is IMHO much better!

 

Just my opinion though...

 

The advantage with a phone call is the direct dialogue where you can question any discrepencies on the spot - and some times get more detail than you would from a carefully worded letter.

 

Idealy use both.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...