Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I know dx and thanks again for yours and others help. I was 99.999% certain last payment was over six years ago if not longer.  👍
    • Paragraph 23 – "standard industry practice" – put this in bold type. They are stupid to rely on this and we might as well carry on emphasising how stupid they are. I wonder why they could even have begun to think some kind of compelling argument – "the other boys do it so I do it as well…" Same with paragraph 26   Paragraph 45 – The Defendants have so far been unable to produce any judgements at any level which disagree with the three judgements…  …court, but I would respectfully request…   Just the few amendments above – and I think it's fine. I think you should stick to the format that you are using. This has been used lots of times and has even been applauded by judges for being meticulous and clear. You aren't a professional. Nobody is expecting professional standards and although it's important that you understand exactly what you are doing – you don't really want to come over to the judge that you have done this kind of thing before. As a litigant in person you get a certain licence/leeway from judges and that is helpful to you – especially if you are facing a professional advocate. The way this is laid out is far clearer than the mess that you will get from EVRi. Quite frankly they undermine their own credibility by trying to say that they should win simply because it is "standard industry practice". It wouldn't at all surprise me if EVRi make you a last moment offer of the entire value of your claim partly to avoid judgement and also partly to avoid the embarrassment of having this kind of rubbish exposed in court. If they do happen to do that, then you should make sure that they pay everything. If they suddenly make you an out-of-court offer and this means that they are worried that they are going to lose and so you must make sure that you get every penny – interest, costs – everything you claimed. Finally, if they do make you an out-of-court offer they will try to sign you up to a confidentiality agreement. The answer to that is absolutely – No. It's not part of the claim and if they want to settle then they settle the claim as it stands and don't try add anything on. If they want confidentiality then that will cost an extra £1000. If they don't like it then they can go do the other thing. Once you have made the amendments suggested above – it should be the final version. court,. I don't think we are going to make any more changes. Your next job good to make sure that you are completely familiar with it all. That you understand the arguments. Have you made a court familiarisation visit?
    • just type no need to keep hitting quote... as has already been said, they use their own criteria. if a person is not stated as linked to you on your file then no cant hurt you. not all creditors use every CRA provider, there are only 3 main credit file providers mind, the rest are just 3rd party data sharers. if you already have revolving credit on your file there is no need to apply for anything just 'because' you need to show you can handle money. if you have bank account(s) and a mortgage which you are servicing (paying) then nothing more can improve your score, despite what these 'scam' sites claiml  its all a CON!!  
  • 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
      • 160 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

expensive photoshoot - need to escape - told cannot cancel - HELP


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4231 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

hello all my cousin went for a photo shoot yesterday and paid £50 deposit to have a cd of pictures on, and to pay £79 a month for 12 months,

 

however her husband has just gone pysco and she has to get rid of them, it says on the agreement she signed that its non cancellable so where does she stand??

 

i just called the place for her and explained but the manager isnt there so they cant do anything tonight, she wants to post the cd and agreement back to them and cancell everything, or her husband will go mental at her, he has already taken her bank card off her

 

i want to hepl her cause i know what he can go like, but dont know how to or what rights she has,

 

thanks for your help

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm pretty sure any contract can be cancelled within 7 days.

matters not what 'their' agreement says

 

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

there are exceptions, like that example yes.

 

ruddy expensive photoshoot!!

 

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

not exactly my ballgame

 

i'll alert the thread for you.

 

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

Hi Sammy,

 

If you want help with this, we need to know the T&C's of the agreement or contract.

 

Do you know the name of the photo company that's involved.

 

There could be other cases here on CAG about them.

 

:wink:

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, legally they are hers and she cannot return them.

 

The contract was agreed; there was consensus in service and consideration, then performed, and now its only the payment that has not been made.

 

Even had this been covered by the distance selling regulations (which it wasn't as mentioned above), there would have been no come back as the photographs are very much a bespoke item, and personalised items are excluded from the DSR (for fairly obvious reasons).

 

Its not really as if after spending the time to take and present the pictures, that if rejected they could then be sold onto the next young girl who came in. Additionally, I would suspect it could also be argued that being on a disk it would be possible to draw parallels with the pictures and software, so returning the disk could still mean the she was in possession of the images.

 

Her only legal way out would be to reject the pictures on quality grounds, although nothing has been mentioned to suggest there are any issues as such.

 

I would also suspect many people would try to back out of this afterwards given the price, so the studio is likely to have well established procedures in how they deal with it.

 

Her best bet would be to go in and tell them she has lost her job, and is now no longer able to afford to pay them - other than that I can suggest nothing else.

 

Sorry.

 

I should add I find the price scary! How many pictures were in the portfolio and by any chance is the photographer's next to a pub?

Edited by Bang!
Link to post
Share on other sites

I looked up to see what Adee Phelan is. He did David Beckham's hair, and one or the salons has a grand piano next to the chairs! The only other thing I could see was he seems to have quite a charitable nature, so perhaps the "job lost" approach directly to Phelan himself may be your best hope.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi there oh crap!

 

she has sent them back with a letter eplaining her situation, will just have to wait and see now,

 

no it wasnt next to a pub i think there was 80 pictures in total

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

hi all

i have recieved a letter from a company called 'oriel collections'

 

i have only been contacting them by email, and they are now threatening court and ccj against me!

 

they havnt said anymore, i dont even have the items anymore as i sent them back with a letter as above and have never heard anything back till this company contacted me, and ive never heard of them

 

what do i do now? has anyone heard off these?

 

thank you i feel sick now with worry

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi all if any one could help it would be much appreciated.

 

cut a long story short- i had photo shoot when i got home found out id lost my job, called the studio (adee phelan) to cancel the agreement and to return the disk of pics but was told the manager was gone, so i explained to her and wrote a letter and sent them straight back in the post, i never heard nothing off them.

 

then a few days ago i received a letter from a company called 'oriel collections' i emailed them a reply as i dont have a phone at the mo and there reply was a threat of court action and ccj against me!

 

i have never heard of them, and feel sick with worry,

 

and im not paying £1000 for something i dont have (not even the free one i was entitled to)

 

i am angry that the studio never contacted me i spoke with the same girl on 3 separate occasions they had my phone no (i did have a phone at that time)

 

thanks in advance any guidance is appreciated x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes heard of them, and like all DCA's they have no legal rights whatsoever, these lot are another 'no win no fee' outfit, so they don't gets paid anything if they fail to collect.

 

So ignore them.

 

Your dispute is with the Photography studio.

 

You could write to them and ask them what they think they are playing at, Don't call them, keep everything in writing or email.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ignore they are a very very lowlife DCA

 

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

Sorry, legally they are hers and she cannot return them.

 

The contract was agreed; there was consensus in service and consideration, then performed, and now its only the payment that has not been made.

 

Even had this been covered by the distance selling regulations (which it wasn't as mentioned above), there would have been no come back as the photographs are very much a bespoke item, and personalised items are excluded from the DSR (for fairly obvious reasons).

 

Its not really as if after spending the time to take and present the pictures, that if rejected they could then be sold onto the next young girl who came in. Additionally, I would suspect it could also be argued that being on a disk it would be possible to draw parallels with the pictures and software, so returning the disk could still mean the she was in possession of the images.

 

Her only legal way out would be to reject the pictures on quality grounds, although nothing has been mentioned to suggest there are any issues as such.

 

I would also suspect many people would try to back out of this afterwards given the price, so the studio is likely to have well established procedures in how they deal with it.

 

Her best bet would be to go in and tell them she has lost her job, and is now no longer able to afford to pay them - other than that I can suggest nothing else.

 

Sorry.

 

I should add I find the price scary! How many pictures were in the portfolio and by any chance is the photographer's next to a pub?

 

Bang is spot on with the legal position, and if I may say, very well explained. The company has performed its part of the contract, now the poster has to perform theirs; i.e.pay. Unless of course, the photos are of substandard quality, or not what was agreed. I don't think there's any Judge who would not award a CCJ. Doesn't matter whether the disk is returned or not, the company has provided their part of the contract, what the buyer does with the photos/disk is immaterial, the company has spent their time and money in producing them, the buyer's consideration is executory (to be performed later) and has to be performed. Possession is irrelevant (unless they hadn't been delivered in the first place)

Edited by rameses_qc

I am a lawyer, but I am an academic lawyer. I do not practice as a barrister or solicitor. You should consult a practising Solicitor BEFORE taking any Court or other action

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the replies, it is fo my cousin but she uses my email,

 

so im not sure what to advise her to do now? she blatentley refuses to pay for something she doesnt have, and they wasnt photoshoped/airbrushed as promised she wasnt overly impressed with them but they were nice enough she said.

 

so what would you suggest i advise her?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sammy,

 

It's no good you phoning the studio to discuss this. Everything must be in writing only.

 

You need to write to the studio setting out any complaint that you have.

 

However, you can't complain about :-

 

1. The price, which you agreed and signed for.

 

2. The fact that you returned the photos (unless the T&C's specifically allow this within a limited period, which I doubt).

 

If you have no reasonable complaint, then you should try to arrange a payment schedule with the studio based on your current income and expenditure.

 

Otherwise, you may find the studio or DCA takes this matter to court.

Edited by slick132

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't bother with the DA at all; they're just nothing and irrelevant. Contact the studio direct. However, for the reasons given earlier, paymnet is due unless you rejected the goods as not up to standard, but this seems not to be the case. The only hope now is an instalment plan of some sort, which is why I say contact the studio. DCAs will rip you off as a matter of course. That's what they do.

I am a lawyer, but I am an academic lawyer. I do not practice as a barrister or solicitor. You should consult a practising Solicitor BEFORE taking any Court or other action

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of the above.

 

A contract was entered into and (we assume) the cost was explained.

 

The photos were taken and the work done.

 

Its irrelevant returning the CD, the cost was in taking the photos, the cost of a CD is about 3p.

 

I cant really think of anyway to get out of this unless somehow the contract is less than cklear and that somehow the person was presuurised or tricked into entering the contract or that the finished product is not as stipulated in the contract and/or is somehow sub-stanadrd.

 

I suspect if this went to court, there would be no real defence and the judge would have to decide in the photo company's favour.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...