Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Update 15th March the eviction notice period expired, and I paid my next month rent along with sending them the message discussed above. After a short while they just emailed me back this dry phrase "Thank you for your email." In two weeks' time I'm gonna need to pay the rent again, and I have such a feeling that shortly after that date the contracts will be exchanged and all the payments will be made.  Now my main concern is, if possible, not to end up paying rent after I move out.  
    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
  • 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

Ideal Shopping Direct (Ideal World TV) and Moorcroft - extravagant admin/penalty fees?


car2403
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4131 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 Forum, long time no speaky...

 

This says it all really, so here goes:

 

Dear Ideal World Customer Services/Moorcroft Debt Collection Limited,

 

I refer to your letters dated 26 September 2012 and 10 October 2012 regarding Order number OW26054812. (and further to Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited’s letter dated 26 October 2012)

 

You both seem to be very confused, so please allow me to try to assist you.

 

Orders placed/returned:

 

Order number OW26015521 was placed on 21 July 2012 and dispatched on 24 July 2012. This was for a “Versus 9 inch 8GB Android 4.0 Tablet” for £129.99, a “Sweex Neoprene Sleeve 10 inch” for £9.99 and a “Collect+ Returns Label” for £1.49, order totalling £141.47. This was to be paid by Flexipay, (£43.80 on 21 August 2012, £43.80 on 21 September 2012 and £43.80 on 21 October 2012) in addition to the £54.85 paid on 21 July 2012 when the order was placed.

 

On arrival, the “Versus 9 inch 8GB Android 4.0 Tablet” was damaged and your customer service team informed. On their instruction, the item was returned, using Collect Plus. They confirm that this item was received by Ideal World at 13:24, Mon, 6 August 2012. (See www.collectplus.co.uk / Track and EYKB4NX as the tracking reference number)

 

As the item was returned, I placed a NEW Order number: OW26054812 on 24 July 2012, which was dispatched 27 July 2012. This was also for a “Versus 9 inch 8GB Android 4.0 Tablet” for £129.99. This was also to be paid by Flexipay, (£43.33 on 26 August 2012, £43.33 on 26 September 2012 and £43.33 on 26 October 2012) in addition to the £49.32 paid on 26 July 2012 when the order was placed. This order arrived a few days after and I have been very happy with the product so far.

 

Payments you have received:

 

According to my Bank records, you have received a total of £235.10 as per the following payments from me:

 

· 23 July 2012 - £54.85

· 27 July 2012 - £49.32

· 22 August 2012 - £43.80

· 28 August 2012 - £43.33

· 24 September 2012 - £43.80

 

This is for items ordered totalling £ 141.47.

 

I therefore conclude that YOU owe ME a total of £93.63.

 

In addition, your letters suggest that I owed you £43.33, plus an ‘administration fee’ of £10, totalling £53.33. On top of that, Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited are now chasing me for a total of £77.43, which is an increase of £24.10, or a 45% increase. Please explain, firstly, where the £10 administration fee comes from, then where the additional £24.10 increase comes from? It seems strange that you are prepared to add £34.10 to a debt of £43.33. Where is this referred to in your TV programmes, on your advertising and/or website, or in the order confirmation/dispatch notifications that you have sent me? I would argue that, at no point in time, have you told me of these charges, nor have I agreed to them. Indeed, I consider them unfair. You clearly do not. Admittedly, this is a moot point as, for the reasons I’ve stated above, I don’t actually owe you anything. You do, however, owe me £93.63, so I would consider it fair that I increase the amount that YOU owe ME by the same amount that you saw fit to increase the amount that you claimed I owed YOU, so therefore I am adding a £10 administration fee on to that, bringing it to £103.63, then I am adding another 45% to the outstanding amount. I calculate that YOU owe ME £150.26.

 

So, in conclusion of this matter, I would like to hear your proposals for when you can pay me £150.26 within the next 7 days, from the date of your receipt of this email, 27 October 2012. If I don’t hear from you before that date, you may take this letter as my notice of intention to bring a small claims court claim against you on 3 November 2012, without further communication.

 

In addition to the above, I will be sharing this story with as many online forums as I can in order to bring your dubious business practices to the attention of as many of your customers as possible. This is one long standing customer that you have lost as a result, and I suspect many others will follow.

 

Furthermore, I consider any further attempt to contact me by phone regarding this matter as an attempt to harass me and as required by section 1 of the Protection from Harrassment Act 1997, I give notice that your actions are causing me to feel harassed and ask that you persist from doing such acts. If you fail to comply with this, I will report your actions to the Police.

 

NOTE TO MOORCROFT DEBT COLLECTION LIMITED: Please consider this letter a formal complaint under your internal complaints process. I understand that you will reply to me and I would like you to confirm what your business processes are to establish that the debts passed to you, from Ideal Shopping Direct, are legitimate debts and are not in dispute as above. Surely you have checks and balances in place to establish that the debts is ‘owed’ before you send me threats of legal action via the Post? If not, I will be taking this further. You can expect to hear from Trading Standards and the Financial Ombudsman if I am not happy with your response. Furthermore, Moorcroft, I also consider any further attempt to contact me by phone regarding this matter as an attempt to harass me and as required by section 1 of the Protection from Harrassment Act 1997, I give notice that your actions are causing me to feel harassed and ask that you persist from doing such acts. If you fail to comply with this, I will report your actions to the Police.

 

I hope this clears your confusion up and finally puts this matter to bed.

 

Kind regards,

Chris

I will of course update as and when I get a response

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove any info that can identify you e.g order numbers. Though I think you may want them to be able to identify your online complaint. smile.gif

 

I have ordered from these people and there was a long delay in the product being received, so I have not bothered since.

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Unky, but the order numbers only identify me to them and I suspect they will know who I am when they read that email anyway. Mind you, it took them about a week to reply to other emails querying orders previously, so I may see something from Moorcroft before I do from Ideal World.

 

It's a shame my (and your) experiences have been so negative - they sell some good products at decent prices, but they really need to sort their service out if they intend on keeping customers in the longer term. I'll be using QVC more often, instead :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck with that Chris, good to see you back :)

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

945076uyzon4w470.gif

 

Had this from Ideal World, clearly before my email was sent:

 

The previous letter sent to your from Ideal World advised that any further declined payments would result in your account being passed to an external debt collection agency. We have attempted to process your overdue payment and unfortunately the card has been declined for a third and final time.

 

We are now in the process of passing over your debt to an external debt collection agency that will be collecting the full amount owed. The total debt at this time is £67.33 which includes the two £10 administration charges plus VAT. The debt collection agency will add their own charges of 14% plus VAT of the total balance. This amount will rise to 29% plus VAT if a doorstep collection is required.

 

You will be contacted shortly by the debt recovery agency. We would advise you to take this matter serious to ensure that legal action is not taken against you.

 

Many thanks

So, let's break this down.

 

£67.33 owed to IW, but that includes 2 x £10 admin charges, plus VAT. (£24) The ACTUAL 'debt' (I 'quote' debt, as I don't owe them anything!) is £43.33. These admin charges account for 55% of the 'debt'.

 

:jaw:

 

Then there's the 'debt collection agency charges'. 14% plus VAT for collecting, (£9.43, plus £1.89 VAT) or 29% plus VAT for doorstep collecting. (£19.53, plus £3.90 VAT) That's, either, 16% in charges for 'collecting', or 34% in charges for 'doorstep collecting'. This is AFTER IW's charges of 55% have been applied to the balance.

 

:jaw::jaw:

 

Remembering that the 'debt' is only £43.33, these 'charges' - both IW's admin charges and those added by Moorcroft - amount to 82% of the balance if I pay now, or a whopping 109% of the balance if I don't pay and they have to send a doorstep collector.

 

:jaw::jaw::jaw:

 

IW are 'explaining' Moorcroft's fees without ACTUALLY telling me what their own charges are for. :mad2:

 

I think I'll file this and have some fun with it later on when they reply. Remember that I gave them 7 days to reply, which is 4th November, or I'll issue a small claims court action without further communication.:madgrin:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply from IW:

 

Thank you for your recent email dated 27/10/12.

 

We apologise for the inconvenience caused.

 

With regards to your query, we wish to inform you that you could contact the DCA on the following phone no.Phone Number - 01614752848. Kindly use the following reference no.

Client Ref # - XXX for more assistance.

 

Should you have any further questions in relation to your query please respond to this email quoting Ref: XXXX. Alternatively you can contact our Customer Service Department via telephone on 08717 123 456*.

 

Yours Sincerely,

 

Terry Fernandes

 

Ideal Shopping

Customer Service Department

 

*Calls cost 10p per minute plus network extras

 

Now, that is an interesting response to a threat of legal action, is it not? I hope I hear back from Moorcroft and receive my full refund before Sunday, or it's straight on to MCOL to issue a claim. Unbelievable that they've effectively dismissed my query and are refusing to call off Moorcroft at this stage! :mad2:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reply from Moorcroft:

 

Further to your recent correspondence, we write to advise we will be communicating further with our client in respect of your raised query.

 

During these communications follow up action will be suspended on your account and we will endeavour to provide you with an appropriate response to your query as soon as possible.

 

However if you have any further queries or require any further assistance in the meantime please do not hesitate to contact me.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

They best be quick about it, time is running out.

 

Hello, guests. Nice to have you here.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Nothing from any of them. Took me some time, but MCOL now issued:

 

Issue - 21 November

Service date - 26 November

Defence/Acknowledgement date - 10 December

Defence date, if acknowledged - 24 December

 

Moorcroft have until 8 December to respond to my complaint, or that will be off to the FOS next

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have IW's attention, now at least. Aside from blaming me for all of this (:-x) the discussions are ongoing. Update soon, as the Court deadline approaches and I don't intend on backing down from my position as I've outlined. Their communications with me will certainly raise an eyebrow from the Judge, when we get there.

 

Oh, IW have 'locked my account for security reasons', so I can't order from them again. As if! What 'security reasons' are these then? I may ask Customer Services to explain that. This seems very unfair to me.

 

As for Moorcroft, they have returned the account to IW. I bet they have! They have failed, however, to reply to me about it despite raising a formal complaint about their handling of this. I shall wait for the 6 week date to pass and get on to the FOS about their behaviour, also.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

These (long and protracted) discussions have been ongoing, but IW now accept my position and have agreed settlement of the claim, which is nice - and all I wanted all along.

 

Happy days...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff Car :)

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...