Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The ideal would be a negotiated discounted settlement  The cards in your hand are that you would most certainly win an irl complaint via the fos And the behaviour of Burlington  Im not so certain that you would win on unfair treatment given that for a LBL company they have been pretty accommodating for the best part of a year  If they don't agree to negotiate on a monthly payment of the 1500 then straight off to the fos Only if things get dicey consider a time order due to your other debt a t/o could get messy
    • Sorry to disagree. Credit file drops off at 6 years, which is the Statute Bar period for 'simple contract debts' But the limitation period for mortgage debts is 12 years.   https://www.nationaldebtline.org/fact-sheet-library/statute-barred-debts-ew-/   So (in theory, at least(, it can drop off a credit file at 6 years, the lender can issue a County Court claim at any point up to 12 years, and IF they do, and IF they succeed, the CCJ then shows on your credit file....... yes, there are lots of 'IF's there, but it isnt as cut and dried as at first glance.
    • Hi all    Thank you so much for all your comments and advice, especially @bankfodder    The treadmill was a Proform pro 1500. Icon are the manufacturer.    Just to clarify this is the second machine we had. The initial treadmill we had for approx 2 months. Again this was working fine one day then would not switch on the next. We reported this to Sweatband who redirected us to the manufacturer. The problem was the same with the electrics however on that occasion the manufacturer indicated there was a problem with alignment of the running surface and they sent a replacement. Now the electric problem is the same issue but they are saying the item is in an unsuitable environmental.    I have reviewed Sweatband's website again and now I notice there is a small Q & A section at the bottom which states as follows:    "Can I keep this treadmill in my garage? if your garage is insulated and is warm and dry throughout the year then it will be OK. However if it's an ordinary garage without heating or insulation we'd say it's better not to put it in there as cold and damp conditions may damage the electronic components."    Do you think this now means we have no protection? I cannot say if this was on there when we purchased the treadmill. I am also reading a number of reviews from other people indicating the treadmill has packed in after short usage. These reviews are all after we made our purchase.    Thank you again  EM0149
    • Begging letter - ignore.   It's not Debt Recovery Plus's debt, so they can do absolutely nothing.
    • I ignore them with a smile on my face, but something needs to be done  Can you expand your hint a little bit ?
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2137 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I recently received a notice of intention to prosecute from First Capital Connect, where they explained my case of ticket dodging and what the maximum penalties that can be imposed on me. I sent them a letter to explain the situation and they replied back saying they will be continuing with the case.

 

However, I was travelling on the same journey again and was checked again by another Revenue Protection Officer. I explained the whole case to him and his opinion. He stated that going to court was the last possible option the Company would pursue. The Prosecutions Department did out of court settlements.

 

And so, my question was, considering the on-fare was £20, what would be an appropriate amount for an out of court settlement?

 

Thanks a lot!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello and welcome to CAG.

 

From what you said above, it sounds to me as if they're planning to go to court. Yes, they sometimes settle out of court and I hope the guys here will advise you on an reasonable offer to make.

 

The company don't have to accept it an out of court settlement, but there's no harm in trying.

 

I hope the guys in the know will be along later. In the meantime, it would help if you tell us a bit more about what happened if you wouldn't mind.

 

My best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What are they prosecuting you for? If they have turned down your 1st appeal it must be quite serious. As the inspector said they do offer/accept out of court settlements on some cases.

 

Anyway, your £20 offer of a settlement won't get you very far on this occasion to be honest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have attached all the interaction i have had with the company to date.. MrGates, the £20 was the initial fine that would have been imposed on me. I was wondering what would be appropriate at the moment.

 

The letters are in date order and my response is stated separately.

 

Thanks again to everyone for replying...

Letter for First Capital Connect.pdf

Notices from First Capital Connect.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again.

 

Mr Gates is right, we need more information about what they want to go to court for.

 

I'm also hoping that if someone like Old-CodJA sees this, they will give you an idea of what offer to make. From memory, it would be something like the unpaid fare plus reasonable admin expenses for FCC, but don't quote me.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you should know that you details are not hidden, you would be better protected if you edited the documents.

 

Thank you for that SRPO. I thought I'd checked, but clearly I wasn't careful enough.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was coming back from Mill Hill Broadway to Kentish town and tapped my oyster at the machine (there are no barriers). Turns out the machine never read my oyster, even though I had enough money for the journey. I was checked on the train for a ticket, which showed that I had no entry for the journey and was thus travelling without a ticket.

 

The officer asked me to pay a partial/full fine by cash or card but I did not have sufficient funds on me. He then took a statement from me about the incident and said I will hear from the company soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been away for a few days and only just seen this. In short it appears that you are likely to be charged with breach of National Railway Byelaw 18.1 (2005) 'Fail to pay fare before travelling' unless FCC feel they have evidence to suggest that you 'intended to avoid a fare' contrary Section 5 of The Regulation of Railways Act (1889)

 

The first charge is a strict liability matter; you do not deny that you were there, you could not produce evidence that you had paid your fare before travelling, pre-purchase facilities were available

 

I suggest that if the TOC goes for the more serious S.5 charge, they must feel they have a strong case, otherwise they would not waste time & money in pursuing the matter.

 

Yes, as HB pointed out, I think that you might like to try sending a letter of apology asking FCC to consider disposing of the case without troubling the Magistrates by accepting your offer to pay the unpaid fare, plus all the reasonable costs incurred by them.

 

If the matter proceeds to court and you are convicted , the TOC will ask the Magistrates to order you to pay the fare and prosecution costs. The cost figure that they usually ask for varies between £120 - £150 and so I suggest an offer in that sort of area will be a sensible and entirely reasonable starting point.

 

EDIT: Of course, you might choose to make a lower offer and see if they accept on the basis that if it doesn't proceed to a Court hearing, a small part of their costs would not be incurred, but it's a matter for you.

Edited by Old-CodJA
Added afterthought
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...
I have attached all the interaction i have had with the company to date.. MrGates, the £20 was the initial fine that would have been imposed on me. I was wondering what would be appropriate at the moment.

 

The letters are in date order and my response is stated separately.

 

Thanks again to everyone for replying...

 

I'm in the same problem how did you settle it out of court...please your answer will be life saving for me..

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...