Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Probably to do with the Creditor accepting the reduced payments claim as part of the IVA. - Thats my guess anyway.  As for the mount outstanding... 60k is incredible and im pretty sure a DRO wouldnt cover that much even after the new legislation.    For you @Alfy - Please stay headstrong and stop worrying. My viewpoint on debt with debt collectors is simple. You are a figure on a spreadsheet loaded into a database for them to run a collection cycle through.  They dont care about emotions or your situation, they just care about paying off their shareholders and trying to turn a profit.  They use varying tactics to increase the pressure on you to the point where you will break. People then fall for this an either cave in to DCAs before doing their own due diligence on the debts that are purchased or turn to IVAs like you have.    They are better ways to handle this and Im glad you feel better after a good nights sleep - I hope you can keep it up. 
    • Good afternoon,    I am writing in reference to the retail dispute number ****, between myself and Newton Autos concerning the sale of a Toyota Avensis which has been found to have serious mechanical faults.    As explained previously the car was found to be faulty just six days after purchase. The car had numerous fault codes that appeared on the dash board and went into limp mode. This required assistance from the AA and this evidence has already been provided. The car continues to exhibit these faults and has been diagnosed as having faults with the fuel injectors which will require major mechanical investigation and repairs.    Newton Autos did not make me aware of any faults upon purchase of the vehicle and sold it as being in good condition.    Newton Autos have also refused to honour their responsibilities under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires them to refund the customer if the goods are found to be faulty and not fit for purpose within 30 days of purchase.    Newton Autos also refused to accept my rejection of the vehicle and refused to refund the car and accept the return of the vehicle.    It is clear to me that the car is not fit for purpose as these mechanical faults occurred so soon after purchase and have been shown to be present by both the AA and an independent mechanic.   Kind regards
    • Commercial Landlords are legally allowed to sue for early cancellation of the lease. You can only surrender your lease if your landlord agrees to your doing so. They are under no obligation even to consider your request and are entitled to refuse. You cannot use this as an excuse not to pay your rent. Your landlord is most likely to agree to your surrendering the lease if they want the property back in order to redevelop it, or if they wants to rent it to what they regards as a better tenant or at a higher rent. There are two types of surrender: Express surrender in writing. This is a written document which sets out the terms of the surrender. Implied surrender by conduct. (applies to your position) You can move out of the property you leased, simply hand your keys back and the lease will come to an end, but only if the landlord agrees to accept your surrender. Many tenants have thought they can simply post the keys through the landlord's letter box and the lease is ended. This is not true and without a document from the landlord, not only do you not know if the landlord has accepted the surrender, you also do not know on what basis they have accepted and could find they sue you for rent arrears, service charge arrears, damage to the property and compensation for your attempt to leave the property without the landlord's agreement. Unless you are absolutely certain that the landlord is agreeable to your departure, you should not attempt to imply a surrender by relying on your and the landlord's conduct.  
    • I had to deal with these last year worst DCA I have ever dealt with. Just wait for the constant threats of CCJ and how you'll lose in court and how they won't do mediation and they want the judge to question you with a load of "BIG" words to boot with the letter. My case was struck out in the end, stupidity on their part as I admitted to owing the debt in the end going through the court process was just a formality as they wouldn't let it drop despite me admitting the debt regardless. They didn't send the last part of the court paper work in so it ended up being struck out     .
    • Well, that's it then. Clear proof of the rubbish cameras. Clear proof of double dipping. G24 won't be getting a penny. Belt & braces, I would write to the address LFI has found, include the evidence of double dipping, and ask Fraser Group to call their dogs off.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Emmared-v-LDK-Security-and-Roxburghe


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4429 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 too got a parking ticket in Nov 2011 at the hospital

 

I bought a ticket put it on my dash went to my appointment

came back and saw I had a ticket on door,

looked at dash and my icket had flipped over when Id shut the door but you could tell it was a ticket!!!

 

I appealed and received 2 letters on different coloured letterhead saying my appeal was unsuccesful.

 

Then I got a letter demanding payment from LDK then had 2 letters from Roxburgh and also 3 phone calls,

1st phone call the man said they would proove I didnt buy a ticket I said well funny that when I have my ticket here he ended up putting phone down on me.

 

Had a call today from Roxburgh saying I need to pay or they will send bailiffs to take my car I said no again they can take me to court.

 

Then now have a letter from solicitors mentioned above saying the same as their letter about costs etc.

 

Hubby is saying to pay but why should I when I have ticket.

 

Their letter also says dont believe what you read on forums as it isnt true....

 

HELP someone what do I do????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Iam being hounded by roxbugh debt collectors at moment they have sent 2 letters and phoned me 3 times the 1st time the man was very rude & told me they could proove I did not have a ticket...I have a ticket h ended up putting phone down on me, then man just rang this afternoon saying if I dont pay my car can be seized!!!

Hubby is getting worried but said Im not paying.

Then got off phone to a letter from a solicitors now!

What shall I do????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their letter also says dont believe what you read on forums as it isnt true....

 

Would you expect a letter from the police to say that? Or from the council? Or from a court? Or from a solicitor?

 

They're cowboys - remarks like that prove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

This sounds like the normal trail of threatograms from a private parking company to me. If you search the forum for Roxburghe you will find plenty about them and I have a feeling none of it's good :). [As in ignore them.] Are the solicitors Graham White by any chance? We don't believe them either.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

IGNORE letters, record phone conversations, then report them to trading standards and the oft.

Or you could have some fun on the phone with them, you could tell them to hold the line while you go to fetch the person they ask for then leave the phone on the side till they get bored. Remember the phone calls are costing them not you. Or you could simply tell them to Fxxx OFF every time they call. They will soon get the message.

hello all:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you record that phone call?

 

They really told you that?????

 

Regardless of whether you did or not, make a formal complaint to the CSA about Roxburghe's telling you that they will send bailiffs

if you refuse to pay an alleged debt which they know to be in dispute.

 

Naughty naughty.

 

By the way, they actually send the letters from Graham White as well,

pretending that they are solicitors when in actual fact they aren't.

 

Graham White have a large folder at the Solicitors Regulation Authority

where they are under investigation for sending out thousands of hollow threats of court action which they never follow through with.

 

Unsurprising really, they'd lose. Badly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want them to go away, say this to them when they next call. "The debt is denied. Under CSA rules you must now refer the matter back to your client. Any further calls to myself will be regarded as harassment, and will result in a formal complaint to the CSA." Do not enter into a conversation with them. End the call. They HAVE to give up at this point. If they don't then they are on very shaky ground. By the way, in order to send a bailiff they need a court warrant. They cannot get a court warrant without taking you to court, you lose, and then you still don't pay up. None of this will happen of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can also tell them that the "debt" is denied and should be passed back to the parking company. You then tell them that any further phone-calls will be regarded as harassment and reported to Trading Standards and the OFT. That procedure is specified in the Consumer Credit Act.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Iam being hounded by roxbugh debt collectors at moment they have sent 2 letters and phoned me 3 times the 1st time the man was very rude & told me they could proove I did not have a ticket...I have a ticket h ended up putting phone down on me, then man just rang this afternoon saying if I dont pay my car can be seized!!!

Hubby is getting worried but said Im not paying.

Then got off phone to a letter from a solicitors now!

What shall I do????

Typical telephone tough guys, I bet they wouldn't talk in the same way to your husband face to face, They're not bullies they are cowards.

Have a laugh with them waste their time and money, if that fails a loud football type whistle usually has the required effect.

regards

Please remember our troops, fighting and dying in our name. God protect them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want them to go away, say this to them when they next call. "The debt is denied. Under CSA rules you must now refer the matter back to your client. Any further calls to myself will be regarded as harassment, and will result in a formal complaint to the CSA." Do not enter into a conversation with them. End the call. They HAVE to give up at this point. If they don't then they are on very shaky ground. By the way, in order to send a bailiff they need a court warrant. They cannot get a court warrant without taking you to court, you lose, and then you still don't pay up. None of this will happen of course.

Hi, sorry if this sounds a silly question but who do you mean when you refer to 'CSA rules'? Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, sorry if this sounds a silly question but who do you mean when you refer to 'CSA rules'? Many thanks

 

Credit Services Agency Code of Practice. Section 4 (j). By implying that they are going to sieze your car, they imply that they will obtain a court warrant, which requires legal action on their part, which clearly they aren't going to carry out (the 'civil proceedings mentioned in that section), they do not have the authority to bring civil action as its not their debt. Only the original debtor or a solicitor acting on their behalf can begin civil proceedings against you for this. http://www.csa-uk.com/media/editor/file/Code%20of%20Practice%202009.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would refuse to accept the calls from now on. If you do record any more, you should have a witness present who may verify that the conversation took place as this would make it stand up in a court of law. These guys are cowboys. Try to ignore from now on. If you are inclined to go down the harassment route, then you must do it by reporting them to Police, Trading Standards, Solicitors body who deals with this etc.

Edited by HYMN AND MI
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now had FINAL WARNING from Graham White solicitors

saying their clients are now offering me a final opportunity to arrange settlement of the amount due...

.or provide them with the info as to who was driving the car at the time.

..Ive already told them it was me!!!

 

If I dont pay them in 14 days they are going to apply for an application to the court under Civil Precedural Rules 31.16

 

- Disclosure before proceedings start.

 

then a load of stuff about rule 31.16!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...