Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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  
    • Seeking further advice now. The 33 days in which the defendant has to submit a defence expires at 16:00 tomorrow. The defendant has submitted an acknowledgement of service but looking to get the claim awarded by default in failure to submit the defence. This is MoneyClaim Online and can see an option to request a default judgement but believe that is for failure to acknowledge the claim within 14 days??  So being MoneyClaim Online, how do I request the claim be awarded in my favour?
    • Have to agree with the above Health and safety legislation is specific in that the service provider in so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees and those not in the employ of the business. You claim is like saying you slipped in the swimming pool area while taking a dip. As rightly stated by by the leisure centre, a sports hall has dedicated equipment and you yourself personally have a legal obligation in mitigating danger or injury to yourself by taking account of your immediate surroundings. Where your claim will fail is if it is reasonable and proportionate to impose liability of the Leisure Centre? The answer has to be no.
  • 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

Citi Financial/Robinson Way Summons Received...


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4550 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

  • Replies 129
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hello all

 

In the spirit of DiskManDave, and Muhammad Ali's 1974 clash against George Foreman, entitled 'The Rumble in the Jungle', I have decided that I've already had enough of Robinson, Way & Co's complete and utter disregard of the OFT's guidelines, and am taking them on in my own battle royale...

 

The Joust at London Scottish House! :mad:

 

I had a loan at Citi Financial, that I know has been over inflated with charges, and currently stands at just over £6000. The repayments were about £150 per month, but I lost my job in the Summer of last year and what with children, rent, etc I just couldn't continue paying. They deferred a couple of repayments for me, at a price of £25 a time, I made a couple of payments where I could, but had to stop completely in November 2006.

 

In December 2006, I moved address, and although I had a redirection, I buried my head in the sand ignored their requests to get in touch.

 

This site gave me the confidence to get my head out of the sand and face my debt, so on 21st March 2007, I sent a CCA request to Citi and, within the allowed timescales, I received what I believe to be the correct documentation, however I will scan and upload this in due course so you wise chaps can verify its legalities.

 

Oddly, within three weeks of receiving this, and with no correspondance in between, the debt was sold to Robinson, Way & Co, who have since written two of their nonsense letters to me. On advise from this site, I sent another CCA request to Robinson Way, which has been delivered and signed for on the 31st May 2007.

 

I've also had a call from them, spouting the usual nonsense of 'there is an agreement because you have paid'.... I've told them to naff off until the agreement is received as per the CCA, and to ONLY contact me in writing, which I'm sure will be ignored.

 

So... This is how it stands. I'd like to make it clear that my quest is not avoidance of the money I owe, but to stamp out the ******'s dodgy practices.

 

It may look like I'm on the ropes, taking some heavy shots, but there is a method in my madness...

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On a serious note spinningfish, if you have a brief re-read of my thread you'll see that I started it off like that and it was they whom turned it into all out war!

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collectors-debt-collection/71386-diskmandave-robinson-way-co.html

 

Don't be to surprised at where this goes, and you're going to need pants made of asbestos when they turn the heat up the RobWay way!

 

Good luck, we're all with you!

 

Dave. thumbsup.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading all the fun and games you guys are having I really want to join in, but none of my debts are with these lovely "people" as yet.

Time will tell I'm sure.

Be VERY careful whose advice you listen too

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not fair Diskmandave and Spinning Fish are having all the fun :( . Robberson Way have so far been nothing but reasonable with me, and go away when I tell them to.... :rolleyes:

 

However they have seriously ****ed off my mother-in-law. They'd better watch out, there's a tough 76 year-old bird after them with a serious attitude. Muhammed Ali ain't in it.... :D

WOOLWICH -S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 03/03/07 :cool:

LBA sent for non-compliance with Data Protection Act 28/04/07 :mad:

 

ABBEY - S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 03/03/07 8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They phoned me at work today out of the blue.

 

You'd think that the CCA requests went straight to them.

 

No doubt the boys will be round soon.

 

They will reposes my house.

 

I can't wait......

 

.....to find out which CCA has put them on to me knowing they havent got one and will set them up for a bill from my friends at the FOS.

 

I will start my own thread on this.

 

Cas

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello all.

 

Let me apologise first, as I have been so swamped with work and home that I just haven't had the opportunity to give this thread all it deserves.

 

Just to update. I have had one letter from Robinson way giving me the deed of assignment, which is just a letter drafted by them stating they have bought the debt.

 

Just to back track, I sent the CCA request, which was signed for on 31/05/07, which they have acknowledged, but have, to date, received nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

No, infact I have now received a letter advising that a debt collector will visit me within seven days, which concerns me slightly as my partner and son are at home in the day and should not be subjected to this...

 

Should I be writing to them to inform them that without a CCA agreement they should not be visiting my property?

 

Barstewards!!! Grrr.... :mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is just the way they work. They tell lies to intimidate you into paying. There will be no doorstep collector . If there is, it is no problem, just say thank you for calling and enjoy your journey back . Door step collectors are a joke, they have no power to do a thing. The only use they are, is of the threatening of use of ( to scare you into payment), or to increase the profile on a hard to collect debt for resale should they manage to procure even a meagre amount per visit .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...