Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • your claim is against whomever fitted that parts.  
    • I would also take this opportunity to add that I don't really understand why you purchased an insurance policy for this watch – unless it offered you something like new for old, accidental damage or that the policy was transferable to a new owner in the event you decided to sell the watch. If there is not the features that interested you then you are perfectly adequately covered by your consumer rights contained in the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and of course it would be unlawful for John Lewis to attempt to exclude or limit liability in case something happened to the watch and it ceased to be of satisfactory quality for a reasonable period of time. By and large these extended warranties are a waste of money
    • Sunak to new MPs at the Kings Speech debate. Rishi Sunak, in the king's speech debate, tells new MPs that "life comes at you fast" on the government benches. "Before you know it you end up with a bright future behind you and are left wondering whether you can credibly be an elder statesman at the age of 44," he adds.
    • Properly declared means that you declared the exact value of the item that you sent and by and large you are limited in the value that you can claim to that declared value.  It seems that you didn't declare the value of the accompanying insurance and so if you want, you can go ahead and claim it and we will help you but by and large although your chances of recovering the value of the watch are much better than 95%, The chances of you claiming the value of the lost insurance are much less.  It's up to you if you want to try . Please do the reading that we have advised and start preparing your letter of claim and post the draft here. I suggest that you think about posting up a draft letter of claim on about Sunday which will give you lots of time to do necessary reading  
    • The dealership is not the issue, the technician who I have known for a long time explained where the fault lies, the other garage for lack of a better word did a very  poor job of putting the brake pad on where the piston was not lined up correctly which caused uneven pressure on inner pad, the peg on rear of pad not sat in grove of piston.
  • 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
      • 162 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

Equita--------> please help urgently!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4620 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 hope someone can help me! :help:

 

I receieved letter saying baliffs (EQUITA) were coming then I called them which they automatically transferred the call to the baliff that was driving at the time so I gathered this would be the actual person that comes to my home! (I am a council tenant)

 

He said that he hadn't received my files yet and im to call him back monday!

but on monday he had come around while I was out and dropped a letter saying payment due in full in 24 hours

 

when I called him I told him I could pay it in full on my pay day

he said ok he'll come round and explain everything to me and that they had added on an additional £200+ I said ok

 

when he came I wouldn't let him in, he wanted to take inventory of my things and for me to sign something to that affect!

 

By saying ok when he said he was going to explain it to me... have I given them permission to come in? (they're like flipping vampires)

 

I am able to borrow the money to pay but I also have found an older bank giro credit letter from the council tax relating to this money owed ..

.I was thinking if I go to the bank if I should just pay the amount I owe for actual council tax that way and avoid the baliff costs?

what do you guys think?

would the reference billing number on the giro slip still be valid?

has anyone done this before??

Am I naive and silly for thinking this would give me grounds to stop them?

 

would they still be after my things?

 

Any advice appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, first things first don't panic,

 

If the bailif comes around to you house you don't have to let him in and make sure you don't sign his visiting order. What he really wants is for you to sing his paperwork and allow him in to se what goods you have.

Is the debt council tax ? And is he at this stage just trying to collect or does he have a court order?

Have you spoken to the council to see if you can make the payment to them (no bailif charges that way) considering how rude bailifs can be. (the council wouldn't want you to complain :)

The bailif only gets paid if you pay them, that's why there charges are always so high.

Hope this help and remember not to worry.

IT'S TIME FOR US LITTLE PEOPLE TO FIGHT BACK:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off DONT let him inif you havnt already. There is nothing stopping you from paying the council direct. The charges are wrong, the most so far you have to pay is £42.50. Thats if he has visited twice which no doubt he will say he has, and also if he hasnt levied anything, possibly he may have levied your car or items in your garden if you have one, but he would of had to of given you a breakdown of fees and costs and a list of what he has levied on.

 

More advice will follow by others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your responses!

 

Yes it is a Council Tax Debt, my car is on finance, so I don't own it out right I pay a certain amount monthly!

 

When I phoned the council they said they are no longer dealing with it, it has been passed to Equita and im to contact them!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi welcome to cag

 

If you have the reference number to the account in question you can pay the Council online...remember to print yourself the receipt.

 

You did right not to allow the bailiff access to your home as this stopped him obtaining a levy (more charges would have been added!!) at the moment you could argue what will be given as a 1st visit fee £24,50 judging by what you say in your post above. If you pay the Council direct and have the receipt. There is NO LAW that says you must deal with a bailiff, as long as you have discharged the debt thats it.... the end.... if the bailiff demands more than a 1st fee £24.50 invite him to take due process to collecting it, tell him you will reply to the claim when the papers arrive from the court????

 

WD

Link to post
Share on other sites

and if you can record the call and ask the bailiff to explain his fees ask him the date of each visit that incurred a fee and the reason for fee

 

fees are set by statute legislation The council tax (administration and enforcement regulations ) 1992

fee charges were amended(increased) in 2006

 

THE COUNCIL TAX AND NON-DOMESTIC RATING (AMENDMENT) (ENGLAND) REGULATIONS 2006

SCHEDULE 5 CHARGES CONNECTED WITH DISTRESS

A For making a visit to premises with a view to

Levying distress (where no levy is made) - (i) where the visit is the first or only such visit): £24.50

(ii) where the visit is the second such visit: £18

no other fees can be charged unless the bailiff has levied on goods to levy your goods he would have to leave you a notice of distress/seizure listing the goods levied

http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/docs/Enforcement_Agent_Charges.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I phoned the council they said they are no longer dealing with it, it has been passed to equitalink3.gif and I'm to contact them!

 

when you phone your local authority you are not dealing with someone who works directly for the council most if not all local authority's outsource council tax collection and enforcement as a rule when Equita are the bailiff firm of choice Capita is the firm used to administrate and enforce council tax Equita are part of the Capita group of company's

 

your council may have passed this debt over to Equita to collect however they are and always will be fully responsible for all actions taken by the bailiff including fees added unlawful this includes fees charged that are not in legislation or charged at the wrong stage of enforcement

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go to the bank withdraw the cash remebering to add the Bailiff Fees owed - 1 visit £24-50 - go to the Council and give it to them. If they then refuse ask for the name of the person and then ask to see the Head of Revenues and explain you have your payment in full inc lawful Bailiff Fees but as Ms XXXX has refused your offer of payment contrary to the Council Tax (Adminstartion & Enforcement0 Regulations 1992 as amended Reegulation 45 (s) states:

If, before any goods are seized, the appropriate amount (including charges arising up to the time of the payment or tender) is paid or tendered to the authority, the authority shall accept the amount and the levy shall not be proceeded with.

You now intend to report the Council to the Local Government Ombudsman for failure to accept your payment made in good faith.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Update!!

 

Hi all,

 

Thankyou for all your advice and reassurance you have no idea how you guys have helped me emotionally (oh the stress!)

 

So I paid the outstanding C.Tax owed via the Councils online service! I used a reference on a letter they had sent to me prior to the baliffs in regards to the correct exact amount owed only to the Council.

 

I received a letter from Equita yesterday asking for the amount they stated on their very 1st letter minus the £200+ they had added on over the phone when I spoke to the Baliff himself! BUT they had including an additional £41.50 .

..then today I received another letter oddly dated a day before the letter I received yesterday stating in bold letters surrounded by a red box "NOTICE OF INTENT"

Here's where it gets weird... they continue on to state in this letter "we note that there remains a balance on your account, and the file is at enforcement stage" they continue to add "we understand that having available income is difficult during these times and even more so as we approach the festive period" then they round up the letter with "failure to respond to this notice will result in your account being passed to our removal teams"...well I thought it already had been and why do they come across caring all of a sudden!? very confusing! or are they confused? or are they playing the fool to try and catch a fool?

 

NB* I only paid what I actually owed the council and not the additional £41.50 Equita have appeared to have added to the amount! should I pay the additional £41.50 directly to Council? should I continue avoiding any communication with the Equiita? I have not spoken to Council yet as I wanted to see what happens and relay to you guys here 1st before my next move!

 

What exactly is a notice of intent? any advice on what I should do next ladies and gents?

 

 

Many thanks :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you pay Council Tax in this manner the Bailiff Fees are paid first, then anything else is allocated to the debt owing. As you only paid what the Council said there would have been some lawful Bailiff fees to be paid as well - it appears they are claiming 1st & 2nd Visit Fees = £42-50 - so in fact the debt was not fully discharged and yes they can enforce for this.

 

Example

Liability Order = £200-00

1st Visit = £24-50

2nd Visit = £18-00

Total due at this stage = £242-50

You pay £200

Bailiff Fee paid = £42-50

Balance paid to Council = £157-50

Still outstanding = £42-50

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This goes against the grain but the way to halt this quickly is to pay the Bailiff - have they given you the option to pay online? If it means drawn out negotiations then back to the Council.

 

PT

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ONCE AGAIN, Equita are attempting to charge their "enforcement fee" to an account BEFORE a valid levy has been made on goods. The local authority MUST be advised that this fee is NOT in accordance with statue law !!!

 

In your case, £42.50 is owing and this should be paid asap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...