Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Hi everyone, Apologies for bringing up the same topic regarding these individuals. I wish I had found this forum earlier, as I've seen very similar cases. However, I need your help in figuring out what to do next because we've involved our partners/resellers. I work as an IT Manager in a company outside of the UK. We acquired a license from a certified reseller (along with a support agreement) and also obtained training sessions from them. The issue arose when we needed to register two people for the training sessions, so we used an external laptop for the second user to keep up with the sessions for only a month. During this period, the laptop was solely used for the training sessions. After two weeks, my boss forwarded an email to me from Ms Vinces, stating that we are using illicit software from SolidWorks. Since this has never happened to me or anyone we know, I went into panic mode and had a meeting with her. During the meeting, we explained that we were using an external laptop solely for the training sessions and that the laptop had not been used within the company since her email. She informed us that for such cases, there are demos and special licenses (though our reseller did not mention these types of licenses when we made our initial purchase). She then mentioned that we had utilized products worth approximately €25k and presented us with two options: either pay the agreed value or acquire SolidWorks products. We expressed that the cost was too high, and our business couldn't support such expenses. I assured her that we would discuss the matter with the company board and get back to her. After the meeting, we contacted the company reseller from whom we purchased the license, explained the situation, and mentioned the use of an external laptop. They said they would speak to Maria and help mediate the situation. We hoped to significantly reduce the cost, perhaps to that of a 1-year professional license. Unfortunately, we were mistaken. The reseller mediated a value €2k less than what Maria had suggested (essentially, we would need to acquire two professional lifetime licenses and two years of support for a total of €23k). This amount is still beyond our means, but they insisted that the price was non-negotiable and wouldn't be reduced any further. The entire situation feels odd because she never provided us with addresses or other evidence (which I should have requested), and she's pressuring us to resolve the matter by the end of the month, with payment to be made through the reseller. This makes me feel as though the reseller is taking advantage of the situation to profit from it. Currently, we're trying to buy some time. We plan to meet with the reseller next week but are uncertain about how to proceed with them or whether we should respond to the mediator.
    • Thanks London  if I’ve read correctly the questionaire wants me to post his actual name on a public forum… is that correct.  I’ve only had a quick read so far
    • Plenty of success stories, also bear in mind not everyone updates the forum.  Overdale's want you to roll over and pay, without using your enshrined legal right to defend. make you wet yourself in fear that a solicitor will Take you to court, so you will pay up without question. Most people do just that,  but you are lucky that you have found this place and can help you put together a good defence. You should get reading on some other Capital One and Overdale's cases on the forum to get an idea of how it works.  
    • In both versions the three references to "your clients" near the end need to be changed to "you" or "your" as Alliance are not using solicitors, they have sent the LoC themselves. Personally I'd change "Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept" to "Dear Kev".  It would show you'd done your homework, looked up the company, and seen it's a pathetic one-man band rather than having any departments.  The PPCs love to pretend they have some official power and so you should be scared of them - showing you've sussed their sordid games and you're confident about fighting them undermines all this.  In fact that's the whole point of a snotty letter - to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did do court so better to drop you like a hot potato and go and pursue mugs who just give in instead. In the very, very, very, very unlikely case of Kev doing court, it'd be better that he didn't know in advance all the legal arguments you'd be using, so I'd heavily reduce the number of cards being played.
  • 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 
        • 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

CapQuest chasing 1999 abbey Overdraft - Court Claim Received


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 377 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, sorry for delay in replying,

I've had a migraine that put me in hospital for a day and I only got back home today.

 

As such I haven't had chance to ring Santander.

 

Should I do this on Monday?

 

I'm worried about this claim as I only have until Friday to respond to it

and I have no idea what the consequences are if I don't respond in time x

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 258
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

you will be responding

don't worry about that.

 

but you have lots of time [defence wise]

[26th april deadline]

 

but you need to ack the claim by day 19

whilst you are around why not go do it now..

 

pop up on the MCOL website

acknowledge the claim

defend all

leave juris unticked

 

ideally you need to get that done

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 gone to far

you do that later

 

 

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

Ahhh yes I see it now, I am just acknowledging it! Right, that is done.

 

 

Thank you for your help, I think you've actually stopped me having a bit of a breakdown :) x

 

I will keep you posted

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

It makes me feel sad and defeated writing this.

 

I have today received a "Judgment for Claimant (in default)" and in addition to what they have said I owe, they have also added on a further £172 for costs.

 

It says at the bottom of the form "

If you ignore this order your goods may be remomved and sold, or other enforcements proceedings may be taken against you. If this happens further costs will be added. If your circumstances chance and you cannot pay, ask at the court office what you can do."

 

I think I am just going to pay it.

This has gone on for so long now and it doesn't look like being resolved unless I pay :(

 

I don't have the money to pay it and I can't even remember what it is all about.

It muddles my head and right at this moment I feel really down in the dumps about it.

 

I'll see if I can lend the money off my brother to pay them and just be done with it once and for all.

 

I am not normally a defeatist but I'm not in good health and I just don't need this extra stress x

 

Sorry I forgot to add that I did what dx advised me to do in reply #167 and have heard nothing at all from that until today.

 

However, it says on this form "You have not replied to the claim form. It is therefore ordered that you must pay the claimant £XXXX.XX for debt [and interest to date of judgment] and £172 for costs

Link to post
Share on other sites

why did you not file a defence in time?

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

I assumed I would get some response to the acknowledgement.

 

I have never done anything like this in my life and I don't know it all works.

 

And I forgot all about it until today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh how I wish you'd actually sent an sar to abbey and gotten all the statement

as i'm sure that before you started to get fleeced by CQ the debt was already 6yrs old.so SB'd

 

 

cost you £255 now to set this aside

and you'll need a valid defence [sB will be fine!]

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

So the way I see it now I have two options:

 

1) Pay the amount and be done with it. Will I have to pay it all in one go or will they allow me to pay in reasonable instalments?

 

2) Pay £255 to get it set aside and (with help from here hopefully) put forward a good reason why I believe it is wrong. If I do this option, my concern here is that I won't be successful and will still have to pay the amount, as well as the £255.

 

Any help/advise here would be most appreciated, this has gotten me so down now x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Option 2 is your best bet if it was SB at the time

 

So quickly work out if it was SB before you started paying them again.

 

Stay positive, you may have a potential defence here, and its a solid one if its accurate

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So quickly work out if it was SB before you started paying them again.

 

How do I find this out? Sorry for sounding so dumb but I really haven't got a clue about stuff like this x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send a SAR to abbey as previously advised.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I will get on this straight away and get it posted tomorrow.

 

 

I'm sure I have done something like this once before though and they returned my money to me. I still have the letter somewhere, will dig it out and see what it says

 

Ok I don't think this is the same thing but here is what I have:

 

Letter from CapQuest dated 16th July 2012

We are writing with reference to your request for further information in relation to your above account.

 

We can confirm we have requestedd this information directly from Abbey, however we are still awaiting a response. Your account is currently on hold, and if interest is being applied this will be frozen.

 

We will be contacting you again within 28 days to advise of the situation.

 

If abbey respond to us within that time period, we will contact you immediately to resolve this matter.

 

Your patience is appreciated.

 

Then I have another letter from CapQuest dated 19th July 2012

 

CapQuest can confirm that Section 74 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 states that an overdraft on a current account will not fall within the documentation requirements of the Consumer Credit Act, Therefore we are not obliged to provide a copy of the agreement for the above account. We return your £1.00 fee.

 

We can confirm that we have requested statements for the above account and these will be forwarded to you when received.

 

The next letter that I received from CapQuest after that is dated 10th August 2012

 

Further to your recent correspondence and in order to process your communication further, we would request you provide the following information by 19th August to assist us in resolving this matter.

 

Details of residence at the time this account was opened 30/04/1999

 

Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. Please note that this is not a demand but a request.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They look like CCA requests responses not a SAR

 

On this rare occasion you could try phoning Abbey and asking when the last payment was. They may or may not be able to help.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SAR satander not abbey

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

what an sar..no

just remember the debt has been sold on.

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

11/08/2012 post says:

I have today received a letter from CapQuest as follows:

 

"Further to your recent correspondence and in order to process your communication further, we would request you provide the following information by 19th August to assist us in resolving this matter: Details of residence at time this account was opened: 30/04/1999. Your assistance would be greatly appreciated. Please note that this is not a demand but a request."

 

Surely they would already have this information? x

 

 

for ref

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

Ok dx I am going on the MCOL site and applying to have the judgment set aside.

 

 

It is asking me to "summarise the reasons why you feel the Judgment should be set aside".

Can you please help me word this correctly?

I am asking for it to be set aside because I believe the debt was already SB, correct?

 

Are there any other reasons I should put as to why I think it should be SB?

Link to post
Share on other sites

why don't you hold on that for a day

theres no harm in you ringing Santander and ask

if they have any info

ideally what you need to know

is the last time you paid in anything to abbey

as if that was more than 6yrs before you started paying CQ then you should be home and dry.

so you are going to be looking to prove there was no payment

before this:

I have been repaying an old debt through CapQuest since about January 2011,

or is this the start date?

On 03 july 09 your account was sold (by way of assignment) to CapQuest Investments Limited who has appointed one of their group companies, CapQuest Debt Recovery Limited to manage your account on their behalf.

for 6yrs

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...