Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, You can't make EVRi investigate something. The only thing you could potentially look to do is take EVRi to court for the value of the lost parcel, however with a value of only £25 there will be limited point to doing that.
    • Is the letter headed Letter of Claim/before Claim or similar? If not, it sounds like more of the threatogram chain. If you're not sure, post up an anonymised copy of the letter and we'll check. HB
    • So guess what, we have received a final demand letter for £100. It states if payment is not made by 11/06 they will have no option but to forward the case to their litigation dept with a view to commence County Court Proceedings. So just wondering if anyone has any advice. Do we ignore this? or do we need to take action? Thanks 
    • hi dx, thanks for helping just re-reading everything this morning and I must have missed this one from uncle in his thread "What you should not do, is not contact the Banks and simply default on payments. "  are you in disagreement with this based on your last sentence?
    • Thanks for the reply and clarification, that might just explain why in my case contact has pretty much ceased. Though with such companies it doesn't mean they won't ever threaten to return to court as a tool to force one's hand if they feel they are not self informed on their chances etc.  But concerning how last year they tried to use the CCJ to get a charging order and the court granted an intirum order on our mortgage using the CCJ that would have been a good 2-3 months beyond the 6 years, should the court not have checked the age of the CCJ in the first case or would they always grant an interim order simply off the back of a CCJ being produced without even checking the age of it?.  Had I not defended that action at the time they may well have got a default using a CCJ older than 6 years which could be a concern going forwards. At the time when I contacted the court to question the paperwork for a final order application the clerk suggested people don't get informed when companies apply for interim charging orders, they are automatic if a claimant has a CCJ and people only get contacted once a date for a final order application goes through. kind of begs the question if such companies can continue a seemingly backdoor method to attempt default action if un-defended if the initial application doesn't need to check the age of a CCJ?.
  • 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
      • 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

Where can I get a free or cheap credit report


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4183 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

I recently tried Noddle for the first time and have to say it was a breeze.

I was able to view the report online within minutes.

This is in contrast to Experian.

I applied online for their £2 credit report viewable online.

Had to wait 9 days for the keygen to come by post to try logging in.

The link they gave me in their original email directed me to the trial membership sign up.

After trying for 1 hour I ended up calling them,and they gave a completely different link.

http://www.experian.co.uk/stat

Noddle certainly runs rings round them.

Just the well known fact that Experian still remain creditors and lenders first port of call.

I am sure that Call Credits free report must be taking business from Experian,and that I think we will see Experian offering something similar in time.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll keep this on this thread if you don't mind as it all relates.

 

I signed up for a 'FREE' 30 day trial for a credit report from Equifax.

 

I had done this before and had registered a bank debit card on an account I have which was on their system. At the time of this last request I had a mere 76p in the account as I don't use it much.

 

I happened to be checking my on-line accounts and noticed this account had gone into overdraft by 24p.

 

 

Not megabucks, but I wondered what this £1 was for and had a niggling suspicion Equifax may have been behind it (Fan Club nose!)

 

I emailed Equifax and asked them if they had indeed taken £1 out of this account and this is what I received back:

 

Dear Andrew1

 

Thank you for getting in touch.

 

We can see that you've signed up for a 30 day free trial.

 

Don’t worry , the £1 deduction is only temporary. Our credit card merchants take £1 off your card to check it’s working properly and then return it to your account a few days later.

 

You’ll find more information about your credit report at: http://www.equifax.co.uk/help. If you have a question, you should find the answer in our FAQ section. If not, you can send us an online query, and attach your documents to it – no need to worry about them getting lost or delayed in the post.

 

I hope you find this useful. If there’s anything else we can do for you, please let us know.

 

Kind regards

 

Equifax Customer Services

 

to which I responded:

 

Excuse me? you have illegally taken money from my account without my permission? - that is theft no matter what amount and whether or not you think you will return it.

 

You had better get a director to explain himself to me please before I take this further and provide me with all the evidence you have which gave you permission to remove this money otherwise this will be reported to the police without further reference to you.

 

Thank you. You will respond by close of business today 7th November 2012

 

 

Is this the Credit reference Agencies gone completely mad thinking they can just dip into our accounts as they feel like as well as our lives or have I missed something in the small print?

 

Anyone any idea?

 

A1 (I'll let you know what they say!-I'm hopping mad here)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Omg what an over reaction!!!

 

They have done a temp hold on £1. It's just an authorisation and no money has actually left your account.

 

You really need to get a grip over this.

 

It's not theft. I wonder how you would react when something serious happened.

 

Ps the police will laugh you out of the station

 

Calm down otherwise you will have a heart attack

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why over reaction when banks charge for going into overdraft ?

Its not the amount but the principle.

By taking the £1 they are depriving you of it,and since this is not something which they make known to customers,then it can be construed as a deceptive business practice.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Omg what an over reaction!!!

 

They have done a temp hold on £1. It's just an authorisation and no money has actually left your account.

 

You really need to get a grip over this.

 

It's not theft. I wonder how you would react when something serious happened.

 

Calm down otherwise you will have a heart attack

 

I'll try not knee jerk a reaction to you otherwise I'll be banned from the site..

 

Over-reaction?

 

My bank statement shows £1 removed. The balance went into overdraft - technically that could cost me £25. I doubt the bank will charge it, but that's the reality.

 

What we have here is Equifax dipping in to my account - perhaps you can explain it in a different manner if I have missed something. As far as my bank account is concerned someone has removed, yes removed £1.

 

To me that is theft. I am not intimidated by numbers either large or small, it's the principle. I live not too many houses away from an MP who was involved in passing the CCA through Parliament back in 1974 and we have some 'interesting' chats about all things credit and CRA's are one of those things. Just remember how these CRA's were set up and why and what legal basis they have in society other than their own ego's then you'll know where I am coming from and how this MP nearly had them closed down before the ink was dry on their headed note-paper at the time.

 

NOBODY, has any right to dip into my account for however long they fancy or whether or not they do it temporarily or permanently without my permission. End of, no more than I have any right to walk into your home without an invitation.

 

A1

Edited by andrew1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, this just got worse...I had a security call from my bank over a number of transactions that same day, this time British telecom where I paid a bill over the phone and 3 land registry searches I did. each one took 10p from the account as a security check without my permission.

 

According to the bank this is normal. I question this so called 'normality' to dip into my account. I was asked by my bank to identify 5 transactions, they suspended my debit card whilst this went on or until I had confirmed these transactions. 4 of them I knew one was for 10p which I didn't know about. It was showing as a 'transaction'.

 

I'm going off on another persons thread digressing somewhat from the main issue of CRA's, but this is all getting a little loose to say the least, once I hear from Equifax I'll post up again their result, but I'm going to get to the bottom of this 'dipping' in and out of my account without permission too..

 

That's 20 minutes wasted over this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Update from Equifax:

 

"Dear Andrew1

 

Thank you for getting in touch.

 

When placing an order online your payment goes through an authorisation process, during which your credit card is charged an nominal fee or up to the value of the products being purchased. Part of this authorisation to debit and return the fee of £1.00 , however this is not credited to an Equifax account it is simply held by the credit card merchant and returned to your account.

 

Please do let me know if the authorisation fee has not being returned to your account so that I can investigate this for you.

 

Kind regards"

 

To which I replied:

 

"I am sorry, but this is not good enough and I have written to a director of your company demanding an explanation. The money was removed - yes, removed from my account without my authority and I want to know what authority you had to take that money and what advice was provided to me that this money was to be removed.

 

Now please do not pussy foot about with " It's all okay, we do it all the time" kind of nonsense, money was removed from my account and I demand to know exactly who gave you that authority as this put me in breach of my contract with the bank and you have an obligation to be transparent and tell me exactly what gives your company the right to do this.

 

Please come back to me by return or get that director Shawn Holtzclaw to reply to my letter of the 7th November.

 

Did you or did you not have authority to withdraw this money from my account Yes or No?"

 

and they came back with:

 

"Dear Andrew1

 

Thank you for getting in touch.

 

I am sorry that you are not happy with the previous response.

 

As we have previously advised this was a pre authorisation charge used to verify the card details on our website and it is a standard process used by many leading online companies. The amount should now be returned on your card however if this is not the case please do not hesitate to contact us.

 

If you’d like to continue with this complaint, you may like to forward the details to the Information Commissioners Office:

 

First Contact Team

Information Commissioner’s Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

 

 

Kind regards"

 

 

Can anyone tell me what the ICO has to do with this? my reply has gone....tick tock.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They explained twice to you that it was not taken and put into their account, and ure still demanding an explanation of who gave authority for the money to be taken? The director is only going to tell you the same thing anyway so they probably are not worried about you advising them that. If the bank have charged you for the overdraft why not pursue the complaint and ask for a refund of the charge? And saying "I demand" is a bit old fashioned and self important, no harm on being firm but quite frankly you can get a point across without being so aggressive

Link to post
Share on other sites

They explained twice to you that it was not taken and put into their account, and ure still demanding an explanation of who gave authority for the money to be taken? The director is only going to tell you the same thing anyway so they probably are not worried about you advising them that. If the bank have charged you for the overdraft why not pursue the complaint and ask for a refund of the charge? And saying "I demand" is a bit old fashioned and self important, no harm on being firm but quite frankly you can get a point across without being so aggressive

 

Okay, thank you for that and I note now that twice I have been told on here that I am either over-reacting or being aggressive. I am a listener and not so arrogant as to believe I'm always right so let me see where I am misguiding myself and why I have generated this response from you learned people.

 

firstly, Basfordlad2 said above in post 11

 

"They have done a temp hold on £1. It's just an authorisation and no money has actually left your account.

 

My Observations:

 

On the 5th November when I looked at my account on-line my 0.76p balance had turned into a 0.24p overdraft. So would I be correct or incorrect in saying that £1.00 had been removed from my account? Yes or No?

 

I say yes, someone, whoever they were, took £1.00 from the account. It had physically been removed. I gave no permission as far as I am aware for that to be taken so from my perspective it had effectively been taken without permission - ie: Theft. (Let's forget the piddly amounts involved here, I'm working with facts, pure and simple)

 

Okay, so that now established, the rest of that post is more to do with my emotional over-reaction and I'll ignore it.

 

I then move on to the next question I asked myself as to who took it. Without going into or boring you with why I deduced this, Equifax were the prime suspect so I popped an email across to them asking them if indeed it were they and this is what they said as reported above:

 

"Thank you for getting in touch.

 

We can see that you've signed up for a 30 day free trial.

 

Don’t worry , the £1 deduction is only temporary. Our credit card merchants take £1 off your card to check it’s working properly and then return it to your account a few days later."

 

So, back to my point, I've established the money went from my account and I have now found the culprit admitting same.

 

Which brings me to Blossom99, your reply:

 

"They explained twice to you that it was not taken and put into their account,"

 

I can possibly agree to a degree you may be correct, it may not have been put into 'their' account at Equifax, but it has been taken by their merchant whoever their merchant may be.

 

So I have confirmation that the amount has gone, it has gone to a merchants account and Equifax must have instructed them to do so. Have I got that right?

 

I still have not been asked if they can take the money - have I got that right?

 

The merchant has just dipped into my account and taken the money - have I got that right?

 

The account has gone into overdraft breaching my contract with the bank as I have no overdraft facility - have I got that right?

 

So am I not entitled to go and ask the perpetrator who gave him or his merchant permission to take this without any permission?

 

How am I wrong thus far?

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the CRAs do this the t&cs of the free trials clearly state what will happen.

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

They do it on eBay sometimes if you register a card, and some hotels even do it when you check in, they may even freeze an amount in your account, I.e if your room rate is £80 they will freeze £80 in your account, therefore you can't give them a card number for an account that you know is empty and then do a runner without paying. I don't mean to come across as insulting or judgemental, it's just that this is becoming more common practice now, and as much as you kick up a fuss nothing may really come of it. I honestly think that if you were not charged for the overdraft just to perhaps let it go and move on (in the nicest possible way)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They do it on eBay sometimes if you register a card, and some hotels even do it when you check in, they may even freeze an amount in your account, I.e if your room rate is £80 they will freeze £80 in your account, therefore you can't give them a card number for an account that you know is empty and then do a runner without paying. I don't mean to come across as insulting or judgemental, it's just that this is becoming more common practice now, and as much as you kick up a fuss nothing may really come of it. I honestly think that if you were not charged for the overdraft just to perhaps let it go and move on (in the nicest possible way)

 

Not taken in any judgmental way believe me. I am always grateful to be put right. My concern is that not everything that is common practice just because everyone does it, is correct. That was proven when we took DCA's to task back in the earlier days of Cag where dca's thought they had some divine right to do what they did whilst ignoring the CCA themselves. What we did in 'correcting' their attitude is legendary.

 

Now Brigadier has stated that what they do is in their t & c's so I'll go take a look at those.

 

Those who know me know I am actually going through quite enough right now and as you say Blossom, I should not spend valuable time on it and should let it go. When you consider the amounts involved it's crazy some may think to even mention it.

 

However, if what they have done is not correct or not as the Brigadier says and in their t & c's then imagine how many times this is being done, where that money sits and the money they are making from those 3 days they had my and everyone else's quid? more importantly any footprint that may have been left on my credit file by breaching the banks t & c's by going into overdraft.

 

I wasn't charged £25 as it happens by my bank and the £1 does not show as being removed now on the historical statement, but it did go out and I did go into O/d - there's a principle here if they hadn't warned it was to happen.

 

I know it goes on as you say and is common practice, but that doesn't make it right.

 

I won't waste any further of your or my time on this as you rightly suggest, but I hope nobody minds when I strip something down to facts that being told I over reacted or it didn't happen when it did needs clarification. I'll go check out the t & c's and thanks Brigadier for pointing that out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a ''notional '' debt, car hire companies will take a deposit the same way, the amount is made available by the hirers bank and will show as a debit but the amount is in suspense and there is no benefit from that sum in favour of the company.

 

The above are the facts.

  • Confused 1

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

  • 4 weeks later...
Is there a CRA which I can use that wont tip off all the various DCA's looking for a Mr Smiff ?

 

Use Equifax or Experian no one knows that you have checked your own files, some like to continue to spread tales of tip offs if this were true Iwould have a mass of letters as I search my own and others files and it causes no problems at all.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...