Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

BT/Moorcroft


GemGem67
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4278 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 all, new here, hopefully I'm in the right place, doing the right thing.

I owe BT 360.00 for a bill and cancellation fees as my contract was for 18 months and I closed it early. I wrote to them explaining my financial situation and made an offer to pay in installments albeit small payments. I didn't hear back from them.

Then about a week ago I started getting phone calls. I answered the first one and a male with a foreign accent asked for me by name, I asked who was calling and he replied "Jimmy". I stated that Jimmy was unlikely to be his name as he sounded neither English nor Scottish and he laughed and asked me to "confirm my DOB and address". I told him I never give out personal details to cold callers either on the phone or at my door due to identity theft and I certainly wouldn't give them to someone with an obviously fake name who refused to confirm his identity. He then proceeded to attempt to tell me I had an outstanding amount, at which point I stopped him and said as he hadn't confirmed my identity, continuing to tell me details of whatever alleged debtor he was calling over would surely be a breach of data protection and that (ok I lied) I had started to record the call and therefore would have proof of such a breach. He then hung up.

The next day I recieved a letter from Moorcroft saying I owe 450.68, 360.00 plus their fees, with the usual demands for immediate payment. I then started recieving phone calls and text messages from them from numerous different numbers, sometimes at minutely intervals, all of which I ignored and added to my blocked list.

I have today recieved another letter from them threatening court action with a further 105.00 in costs applied.

My account is still accessible via BT website, with the link to pay through the site still active.

So my question is, am I correct in ignoring Moorcroft and making payments as offered to BT, direct to them through their site, despite them not replying to me?

Thanks

Gem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Welcome to CAG>

 

If have access to the BT account pay BT.

 

Did you receive a Notice of Assignment from BT?

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for the welcome and reply.

I don't know what a letter of assignment is I'm afraid.

I recieved a letter off BT Debt Recovery Unit after I had made my offer which neither acknowledged nor referenced my offer. It was a standard letter saying to ignore if I had paid in the last 7 days and if I hadn't, to pay within the next 10 days. At the bottom of the letter it said; " If you don't pay right away, we'll hand your case over to a debt collection agency, you will need to pay aditional costs and they might take legal action."

I don't know if this counts as a letter of assignment.

That letter is dated Sept 4th and my first call from Moorcroft was on Tues 18th Sept, which is 14 days apart but only 9 working days.

I thought only a comapny I had an agreement with could take it to court and a DCA had no rights to do so as I have no agreement with them?

Gem

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, NOA is a letter telling you that the debt is now in the hands of a third party (the debt collection agency) if they did not state which DCA then it is not an NOA>

 

Please Check your credit reference files for the debt Moorcroft may have purchased the debt.

 

Can you post up Moorcrofts letter after removing all personal and account identifiers and barcodes if any.?

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a scanner or any means to connect my mobile to my laptop to upload the letter unfortunately but here is the content.

 

Dear xxxxxx

Re: British Telecommunications PLC Balance 450.68

 

We have been instructed by our clients to collect the above amount owed by you. This amount includes a debt of 360.00 to our client and our costs and charges.

To prevent further action pay this amount immediately using one of the methods below.

 

The second letter.

 

Dear xxxxx

Re: British Telecommunications PLC Balance 555.68

 

IMORTANT INFORMATION - LITIGATION

To prevent the above possible action please send payment before 29/09/12 or telephone xxxxx immediately.

If you do not contact us following reciept of this letter we may have no alternative other than to recommend that solicitors issue legal action against you which may follow. Please note if legal action is necessary and if the solicitors instructed are successful in entering judgement then your debt may increase as follows

current balance 555.68

solicitors costs for issue of claim 50.00

court fees for issue of claim form 30.00

solicitors fees for entering judgement 25.00

total debt if judgement obtained 660.68

 

 

I have no intention of contacting them or paying any moneys to them, on the BT website my debt still stands at the original amount, and I will be making payments direct to them through there, so if court papers do appear I will be able to show intent and actual payments to pay the debt off, hopefully that would prevent a CCJ judgement.

Gem

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear xxxxx

Re: British Telecommunications PLC Balance 555.68

 

IMORTANT INFORMATION - LITIGATION

To prevent the above possible action please send payment before 29/09/12 or telephone xxxxx immediately.

If you do not contact us following reciept of this letter we may have no alternative other than to recommend that solicitors issue legal action against you which may follow. Please note if legal action is necessary and if the solicitors instructed are successful in entering judgement then your debt may increase as follows

 

read the quote above when you get to the RED bit's sit down stick 1 finger in the air and say YE RIGHT after all they are only trying to scare you. if you can still pay via there web site do it that way as the DCA does not own the debt as they mention THERE CLIENT.

PHOTOBUCKET TUTORIAL IS NOW DONE HERE IT IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moorcr@p can't issue court papers, so I fail to see why they continue lying to people claiming all the BS they spout in their silly little letters.

 

Pay BT direct and ignore these children.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...