Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm afraid that I think that as you've assembled the chair and you are unable to return it into its saleable condition, then you probably have a problem. I don't think you could take advantage of the distance selling rules in those circumstances and that means that the seller would be entitled to apply conditions to the return of the item. If that's the case then you only fall back is that the item was defective if you find that there is something wrong with it which is preventing its disassembly. On the other hand, this itself raises an interesting issue. Does a chair become of unsatisfactory quality because you can't take it apart and put it in a box? From the sounds of it, the sellers terms and conditions that there is a restocking fee for the return of an online sale even if it is within the 14 day period, seems to me to be quite unenforceable but on the basis of what you say, that issue doesn't arise here because you are unable to put the chair back into its saleable condition and it's not clear that the chair is defective - 
    • Hi everyone, I'm in need of some urgent advice please. Apologies for the long post - I felt it was better to provide all the information clearly at the outset.   I purchased an office stool (that cost £104.39) online, which was delivered on 18th May. After assembling the stool, I found it wasn't suitable for me, so contacted the seller on 27th May to initiate a return.    The seller told me that there would be a "£24.95 handling charge" for returning the item. He quoted the terms and conditions from their website to back this up (please see below), although this is confusing because 35% of £104.39 does not equal £24.95: "Please note that furniture items are subject to a 35% restocking fee. Furniture returns will only be accepted if the item is unused and still in the original packaging. All furniture returns must be made within 14 days of delivery."   I told the seller that, under the Consumer Contract Regulations, the trader cannot charge any fees in the event of cancellation. The response was: "If you not happy to pay for the collection charge for us to arrange this with a courier to uplift then you can send this back to our office directly arranging your own courier, please note we would not cover the cost if this is the case."    I agreed to this, because from my reading of the CCR I thought that the customer was responsible for return delivery:  (5) The consumer must bear the direct cost of returning goods under paragraph (2), unless— (a)the trader has agreed to bear those costs, or (b)the trader failed to provide the consumer with the information about the consumer bearing those costs, required by paragraph (m) of Schedule 2, in accordance with Part 2. Also, from getting quotations online I thought I could arrange delivery, for what was at the time a smallish box, for a much cheaper price (£7-8).   However, when I tried to disassemble the stool for return, it would not come apart. I contacted the manufacturer for further guidance, but the only how-to video they had available was not applicable to the model, and the manufacturer representative was unable to provide further instructions.   I have now been sent a 'built box' to return the stool without the need to disassembly. The issue is that the size of the box means that shipping charges are now £30 minimum i.e. more than the 'handling charge' the seller quoted.    Am I obliged to pay this return fee, or should this actually be something the seller should pay for? 🤔 I feel like I may have two potential arguments against it: Return delivery would not be nearly so expensive if the stool had come apart as the manufacturer said it should.  The Consumer Contract Regs state that a consumer is not responsible for return shipping if the trader has not provided information about the right to cancel and about return shipping on a durable medium.    What even counts as a durable medium? The dispatch note that came with the stool had no such information, while the order confirmation email simply had a link to their terms and conditions (which includes the statement about the restocking fee quoted above).   Does this clause mean the seller is still obliged to pay return shipping? Any advice would be greatly appreciated! I'm starting to stress a little about this because the 28-day cancellation-and-return period will be in two working days (although I realise that may be extended if it can be considered that the seller did not provide the required cancellation information).    Thank you in advance!  
    • so what you mean is that "each" parcel contained a single dinner plate. Thank you that clarifies things. As you been advised by my site team colleague, please make sure that you read around a substantial number of the Hermes stories on the sub- forum. You will get to understand the principles and also the similarities and approach from Hermes. Of course Hermes is being abusive of the system because they exploit a taxpayer funded under resourced justice system simply to put their customers into a kind of triage where only the most persistent finally get through to the end which is almost always – mediation – and then will manage to get their money or most of their money. Hermes are abusive of this system and of course they are actually going to spend more money than the value of your damaged items trying to smash you down. Because their attempts to crush you are effectively subsidised by the taxpayer, they don't really care. Make sure you understand what they will say about the prohibited items list because your plates are made of china or porcelain and will be prohibited items, according to Hermes. On the other hand, they were correctly declared and they were accepted for delivery. The values were correctly declared – and once again after you have completed your reading, you will understand the significance of this. Hermes will also try to say that you didn't have a contract with them and you should sue packlink – who conveniently – are based in Spain outside the jurisdiction. They were say that you are attacking the wrong people. Once again, when you have completed your reading you will understand the standard reply to this. Once again you will discover that this is Hermes being abusive of the system and misleading their customers as to what their rights are. Make a formal complaint to Hermes. Tell them that they are responsible. Don't give them a deadline, but wait a reasonable time – 10 to 14 days – after which you will send them a letter of claim if they haven't put their hands up by then or if you have had no response. By that time, you will have done enough reading to understand the way it goes but we will advise you and support you all the way.   Come back here when you have been knocked back by Hermes and we will take you through the next step  
    • @BankFodder is this ok to send to all contacts at aviva regarding the final notification debt letter theyve sent   I received your correspondence regarding the notice of debt dated 8th June received 12th June giving me 7 days to make payment. I don’t owe this money and the policy was taken out by my brother by a fraud in which you were complicit. The police are aware I have a crime reference number 1XXXXX this fraud is being investigated by PC XX, she will be emailing yourselves I give full authorisation for her to discuss any aspects of this case with yourselves.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3250 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

Over the past month, I have had numerous phonecalls from a mobile phone number I don't recognise (got the number by dialling 1471). No message left on my answerphone so, I just ignore them. (had a suspicion it might be from a DCA). My phone number is ex-directory but it seems that these parasites can somehow get hold of ex-directory numbers.

 

Anyway, I was out all day yesterday and didn't get home until 4am so slept very late into this afternoon. Comes down to find an envelope. In it, it contained a business card from Scotcall - complete with the same mobile phone number that keeps ringing me.

 

I suspect this is for an old debt which is either just gone past it's sell-by date or just coming up for it. I think it is for an old Barclaycard debt. If it is, then it has done the rounds of nearly every DCA in the country!

 

I have not been taken to Court.

 

They have threatened on the card to come back again (harrassment?)

 

My attitude to them is to go away in short, sharp, jerky movements. I will not contact them, talk to them or in any way be intimidated by them but they do seem to be getting rather desperate.

 

Even if I did admit such a debt, I do not have the means to pay a penny. I was widowed earlier this year and my late husband left me virtually penniless (he didn't have life insurance). I have to live on £300 a month which consists of my late husband's two small pensions and the Widows Pension (can never remember what the new name for it is). I've cut expenditure to the bone and am thankful at the moment it is not too cold so have kept my central heating off. Thankfully, I get most of my rent and council tax paid for me but it is still a struggle. There are very few jobs here, not even temporary jobs and being in my mid 50s doesn't help either. I don't seem to get past the application form stage!

 

I wish I could find a job as it would at least get me out of the house for a while. I started machine knitting again in the hope that I would be able to sell some knitwear. Sod's law, the machine broke down and is now in for repair. Anyway, I digress.

 

How to deal with ScotCall. Should I just carry on ignoring them and hope they get fed up and go and annoy someone else? Incidentally, I had the Barclaycard in 2004. For some reason they put a stop on the card before it had reached it's limit of £500 despite the fact I used to pay the balance always on time so the initial debt was just over £400. We fell into financial hardship and I couldn't pay the outstanding balance. The last time I had a DCAs letter about this was a year ago - they were claiming just over £800. Said letter went in the shredder.

 

It's been a horrible year and despite everything that's happened, I try to remain upbeat but I am starting to lose hope now. Things can only get better doesn't seem to be happening despite my best efforts :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

right first get the letter (from the Library on here) that removes right of access to your property they have no right to enter or approach it. Next I would send the phone harassment letter to them to stop the phone calls. After they have been sent to Scotcall, lets see what happens (if its statute barred) I suspect they will leave you alone and move on however they may carry sending letters. Thats what I would do to them (and I have done it myself) and its amazing how they stop contacting you when it appears you have had advice and sent official letters to them. Dont ring them regardless of what they send or ask, always state you acknowledge no debt whatsoever.

I know my rights Mr DCA I'm with the CAG......hello hello where you gone Mr DCA8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just ignore them.

 

If they want to waste their time visiting you, it wont cost you a penny.

 

Remember, they have no power.

 

Alternatively, you could send a text, a copy of which you keep, staing that you find their actions and calls to be harassment and should there be one more instance, you will contact the police for this criminal act and will seek compensation fro the distress caused. See Protection From HArassment Act 1997. It's very simple.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just ignore them.

 

If they want to waste their time visiting you, it wont cost you a penny.

 

Remember, they have no power.

 

Alternatively, you could send a text, a copy of which you keep, staing that you find their actions and calls to be harassment and should there be one more instance, you will contact the police for this criminal act and will seek compensation fro the distress caused. See Protection From HArassment Act 1997. It's very simple.

 

Thanks Kurvaface - my sentiments exactly :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You've probably had a visit from a pensioner in a grubby mac who's trying to earn a few bob on a commission basis. He has no more rights to be on your property than a Pikey collecting scrap metal. ;)

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

ignore snotcrawl

 

the most bottom fed feeder if there was one

 

its quite funny actually talking to Mr C.

 

he said he would come to john o'groats to doorstep me on a debt from 1983 once!

 

never has!

 

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
You've probably had a visit from a pensioner in a grubby mac who's trying to earn a few bob on a commission basis. He has no more rights to be on your property than a Pikey collecting scrap metal. ;)

 

Dammit! Now there's a job I could do...except I think I'd rather scrub toilets.

 

Poor as a church mouse yep, turning into a parasite - no.

 

Love the Snotcrawl name for them too LOL.

 

I have a feeling this creep might be back. Now, he'd better hope that he doesn't actually meet me.

 

He might think I'm tiny and a soft touch...he'd be thinking wrong. I was a taxi driver (nights) for many years and used to dealing with bullies.

 

No doubt I'll have a few more phonecalls next week. Really must invest in a Truecall:-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received another phone call from Snotcrawl today (didn't answer the phone - let the answerphone do that for me) so I'm now keeping a record of these calls and any more unauthorised visitations from their bully-boys. I'm quite happy to let them waste their time and phonecalls for a while...then I'll have playtime :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Ah. Had yet another visit from Snotcrawl this afternoon. Didn't even hear him at the door as I was in the kitchen at the time. My German Shepherd heard him though and stuck his head through the catflap. Mr Pestcollector beat a hasty retreat :lol:

 

These people are really getting quite tiresome. Now wait for the barrage of phone calls again. They've been quiet since I last posted.

 

No doubt they'll be back. Twice now they've broken the law so, let them carry on for a while and I'll report them to the OFT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice one LP

 

I send them'

 

"Both my dog and I have experience of doorsteppers and I have read your letter in full to my dog, who is acting as my agent in this matter, and all queries should be addressed to him c/o The Kennel at my usual address."

 

love

 

vic

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Post # 3 is dead serious.l

 

Harassment is a criminal Act.

 

If you have notified them that their calls and visits are deemed to be harassment and they continue, just once, they have broken the law. You can report this to the police.

 

The Law is very Clear and it also allows you to seek compensation through the courts for the distress caused.

 

Read The protection From Harassment Act 1997. send the text or write / email them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO (and backed up by people who know their stuff) it wont be harassment if they keep contacting you but you keep ignoring them. You have to contact them first and tell them you cannot pay (if that is the case).

 

You can continue to ignore them if you want - as long as you are happy to keep recieving the calls/visits.

 

The way it looks at the moment (and would be defending in court) is that they were trying to contact a debtor who was refusing to admit/pay their debt and was deliberatley being evasive.

 

The first question the OFT/TS will ask you is why didn't you respond to the DCA - don;t forget they are not there to stop genuine debtors from engaging with DCAs, so you will get very little protection/assistance from them.

 

 

To add, I appreciate that the view on here is that if you admit the debt it will mean even more hassle - so you may not want to do that - but I don't think you can have your cake and eat it with regards to ignoring them and expecting them to get into trouble for trying to contact you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm Sorry. The law is clear and concise. The harasser only needs to notified that their actions are harassment once. If repeated an offence has been committed.

 

It has nothing to do with what you can or cant pay but it has everything to do with what a reasnably minded person would deem to be harassment. Recently MBNA lost a case chasing 20K because of their telephone pestering of a debtor and they had to pay compensation.

 

 

1 Prohibition of harassment.E+W

(1)A person must not pursue a course of conduct—

 

(a)which amounts to harassment of another, and

 

(b)which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.

 

(2)For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.

 

(3)Subsection (1) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows—

 

(a)that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,

 

(b)that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or

 

©that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable.

 

 

2 Offence of harassment.E+W

(1)A person who pursues a course of conduct in breach of section 1 is guilty of an offence.

 

(2)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or both.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ghost and kurv

 

I think LP is on top of this.

 

I tend to agree with ghost in that OFT guidance permits a doorstep to arrange a doorstep and my initial tactic with Resolve/snot/call was to answer the door and politely say Foxtrot Oscar or I will call the police; however contrariwise, I react quite strongly to doorstep threats hence if snotcall can be agents for a DCA acting as agents for an OC, then it’s logically consistent for my dog to be my agent.

 

For the benefit of new readers:

 

1. There is nothing to fear from doorstoppers; the only thing to fear is fear itself

2. One needs to make clear that the scare tactic does not work; snotcall are on commission and the poor b*gger stepping is on payment by results only

3. One needs to hold the ‘owner’ of the alleged debt accountable and responsible for all this; and I like the EU Credit Directive 2010, that is underplayed by many; I have found that all DCAs, tame 75p solicitors for hire and doorsteppers back off sharply when challenged to produce a NOA as required by said Directive. (If I suspected an alleged debt had really been sold, I would deploy different tactics)

4. Then one reports the responsible CCLicence holder to OFT and makes a complaint to FOS and the ‘solicitor’ to SRA. There s little point advocating criminal law sanctions when PC plod views it as a ‘domestic’.

 

Just my thoughts of course, but it works for me.

 

love

 

vic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi ghost and kurv

 

I think LP is on top of this.

 

I tend to agree with ghost in that OFT guidance permits a doorstep to arrange a doorstep and my initial tactic with Resolve/snot/call was to answer the door and politely say Foxtrot Oscar or I will call the police; however contrariwise, I react quite strongly to doorstep threats hence if snotcall can be agents for a DCA acting as agents for an OC, then it’s logically consistent for my dog to be my agent.

 

For the benefit of new readers:

 

1. There is nothing to fear from doorstoppers; the only thing to fear is fear itself

2. One needs to make clear that the scare tactic does not work; snotcall are on commission and the poor b*gger stepping is on payment by results only

3. One needs to hold the ‘owner’ of the alleged debt accountable and responsible for all this; and I like the EU Credit Directive 2010, that is underplayed by many; I have found that all DCAs, tame 75p solicitors for hire and doorsteppers back off sharply when challenged to produce a NOA as required by said Directive. (If I suspected an alleged debt had really been sold, I would deploy different tactics)

4. Then one reports the responsible CCLicence holder to OFT and makes a complaint to FOS and the ‘solicitor’ to SRA. There s little point advocating criminal law sanctions when PC plod views it as a ‘domestic’.

 

Just my thoughts of course, but it works for me.

 

love

 

vic

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think your dog would make a far better agent than the OC's:-)

 

The nice thing about the 1997 act, is not the criminal element, because in my biased opinion they are all criminals so have no fear of it, but rather the civil element which allows you to take the harasser to court for compensation. Now that language, they do understand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
However contrariwise, I react quite strongly to doorstep threats hence if snotcall can be agents for a DCA acting as agents for an OC, then it’s logically consistent for my dog to be my agent.

 

Brilliant!

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi kurv

 

I totally agree that implying a criminal transgression may strengthen a civil claim; my response to telephone harassment at work is:

 

"You have telephoned me at work in a manner that appears to breach Office of Fair Trading and other regulatory bodies’ guidelines. I have verbally requested that you cease this breach; I reiterate that now. Your telephone calls have the effect of psychological harassment and act in a way that is likely to be publically embarrassing to me. Your telephone calls may jeopardise my continued employment and result in significant financial loss.

Should you choose to continue to breach regulatory guidelines and UK and EU law by telephoning me at work I will report your activities to the Office of Fair Trading and the Financial Ombudsmen Service and other relevant agencies."

 

This prepares the ground for a substantial claim.

 

And, thank you Donkey:-); it's merely the logic of the EU Directive, "We're all in this together", you clam money from me then you assume responsibility for my lawful consumer rights; they do not like this.

 

x

 

v

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Snotcrawl's website makes a lot about their abiding by the CSA's meaningless code of practice, but is silent on its obligations under the law and its consumer credit licence. Just the sort of low standards we'd expect from the debt industry.

 

They're recruiting, too; apparently being a self-employed doorstepper provides an exciting opportunity to run your own business from home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi SP

 

Quite, however the message we need to reinforce is that folk should not be afeared of them; I actually felt quite sorry for the chap who called. Once our people stop being afraid of this 'threat', it ceases to be a threat and assumes the status of an amusement within their computer generated danse macabre.

 

x

 

v

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm Sorry. The law is clear and concise. The harasser only needs to notified that their actions are harassment once.

 

So has the OP notified the DCA that they consider this harassment?

 

Don't forget - the debt collection guidance etc mainly says what you CANNOT do - DCAs are within their rights to visit and call debtors to get money back. They are also within their rights to keep visiting a premise if no one (appears) to be there to try and make some contact.

 

It may well be harassment if they continue to door knock when the debtor has a valid reason for not wanting them to (or has told them not to) - but that doesnt seem to be the case in this situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I have been reading this thread and finding a little daunting, I wonder if anyone can help me on this,

 

Our friends @ Scott Call have been harassing my parents for a settled debt, I haven't live at my parents address for the last 20 years and they are constantly calling my mum, who is 75, and threatening to come round their house. I have phoned them direct and they have all my details apart from my DOB, so I stupidly gave them this as I didn't want them to contact my parents any more.

 

I cannot see how they can have a debt at my parents house and have the audacity to keep calling them and basically threatening them.

 

Please can anyone advise if there is anything I can do to get them off my parents back and tell them to go away as mu mum is getting worried they might use force. All I want is the calls to stop :-(

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Lou

Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned throughout the forum - they don't really have powers to do much if they visit in person - but obviously they could pressure your mum into paying.

 

Has your mum taken any steps to actually verify and confirm that no debt exists?

 

You say verified debt - is there paperwork to show the debt is settled and is it clear that it is the same debt that is being chased for?

 

Effectivley, 2 things will happen - they will either give up, or keep trying until your mum shows she owes nothing or pays the outsanding amount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Ghost,

 

The call centre is very childish and wont talk to me about my issue, as they haven't got the correct details. The reference has a name of the debt I use to have back in 1997, which was definately closed, however, I don't have any details of this debt anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they haven't got the same details as yours they are chasing the wrong person and are breeching OFT guidelines. Both you and your parents need to complain to your respective Trading Standards.

 

If it is in fact your debt from '97 and nothing has been paid for a period of six years (five in Scotland) & no written admission of the debt it will be Statute Barred in any case.

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...