Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 1 Date of the infringement 23/10/2019     2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] No idea on original but Debt Recovery Plus states their notice is 07/01/2021   [scan up BOTHSIDES as ONE PDF- follow the upload guide] please do not put JPG Picture files into your post   3 Date received 11/01/2021   4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?] Back of letter mentions it.   5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Photographic evidence I went in and out of the car park, also I have evidence the payment machine was not working.   6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No as didn't know I had it.   Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up n/a   7 Who is the parking company? Smart Parking Ltd   8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] Bell Centre Melton Mowbray   For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. Not been given the option   There are two official bodies, the BPA and the IAS. If you are unsure, please check HERE   If you have received any other correspondence, please mention it here Second letter demanding payment by 29/01/2021     Parking.pdf
    • Sorry, what you've typed above seems to be a bit of a jumble and I'm not sure what the various bold text and coloured text sentences are meant to be. Please could you just post up what you are intending to write. Also, are you sure the DPD local is actually P2G?   Who did you make your contract with? Who provide you with a receipt? With whom do you have the account? Presumably at the bottom of some of the documents you've been receiving, there are the company registration details for DPD local. If that is right then I would have thought that you should simply be suing DPD local. You have the documents in front of you are not me – so you will have to decide that it seems to me that they are poised to reject a claim on the basis that you are suing the wrong identity – and that would mean a waste of money and having to begin again. They are obviously trying to be quite slippery with all their their identities. I think you should examine your account and who you paid.  
    • @Tartan Barty   Tartan Barty's Content (consumeractiongroup.co.uk)    
    • Yes, you're right - hoping they would just do the right thing I guess. So template if not a business would be    Dear   [Reference: (Your products and service)   I am writing to complain about the service you provided when [describe].   We agreed that the service would be performed on (date) However (description of what happened) It has now become apparent that the service you have provided is deficient in the following respects [describe].   Section 49 of The Consumer Rights Act 2015 requires you to carry out your service with reasonable skill and care. The problems described above show that you failed in your legal obligations. I therefore have a claim against you for breach of contract.   As a result of the incident I have suffered consequential losses, which you are liable to compensate me for. These losses are [value/details].   Section 57 of The Consumer Rights Act 2015 prohibits any terms and conditions from restricting a consumer’s rights under the Act.   Under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 remedies for breach of contract must be performed within a reasonable amount of time, without significant inconvenience to me, and whilst the company bears all necessary costs.   I therefore look forward to receiving your reply within the next 14 days.   So could it be  Letter of Claim.   **** – TTL - is claiming £541.89 from Parcel2Go.com Ltd, trading as DPD-Local-Online.co.uk  - DPDLO. This is to cover the costs of TTL having to send a replacement parcel to a customer, as a result of DPDLO refusing to provide the delivery information (courier company and local tracking number) required for TTL to refute a non-delivery claim by the customer. Parcel sent August 20 2020 and delivered August 28th 11.30am (according to DPD tracking)    The customer contacted TTL in September to confirm non-delivery. TTL contacted DPDLO to obtain their information on the shipment, and they raised a Case, and subsequently attempted to close the Case : We’re pleased to let you know that your parcel DPD4227962 has been located. This enquiry has been closed as your parcel has received new tracking events or has been delivered.   TTL asked DPDLO by email for the details behind the above – who made the delivery, where to, who to – obviously basic information needed to check the School’s claim for non-delivery, and which would be expected to be readily available from the DPDLO records.  Despite numerous repeated email requests, DPDLO consistently refused to give TTL this information, and also declined to give TTL information to enable direct contact with the local courier who actually made the delivery on behalf of DPDLO.   Without this information it was obviously impossible for TTL to refute the School’s claim for non-delivery.   Even when, Dec 2nd, DPDLO confirmed that DHL was the local courier, they declined to give TTL the DPDLO / DHL tracking number that would have enabled DHL to identify the delivery.   As a direct result of DPDLO’s refusal to provide the perfectly reasonable information requested, confirming the delivery to the School, TTL is unable to refute the School’s claim for non-delivery, and is left with the full cost of sending a replacement parcel to the School.   The detailed claim comprises AU Customs Declared Goods Value £ 425.00 and shipping £116.89 I look forward to receiving your reply within 14 days.     
    • as said before you NEVER ring a DCA or their dogs ever ..they will LIE TO YOU.   trustonline.org using your old name and address. get the CCJ numer then go ring northants bulk as advised earlier.    
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2882 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

We sent a PPI claim form to Tesco for a loan that had been paid off several years ago.

 

They took longer than the 8 weeks to give a final response, sending a couple of letters inbetween.

 

On 23rd feb we received an offer from them as they agreed they couldnt confirm accurate information had been supplied when it was taken out, the amount was £3016.

 

We sent the acceptance form back which said payment would be made within 7 days,

 

its been longer, so my husband called today and was told there had been a 'mix up' and the payment team would call him back.

 

They have called back and said they made an arror with the first offer

and the amount they want to offer is now £2600!

 

Where do we stand with this?

T Mobile (Red) £194.58 Cleared - November 2008 - Statute Barred

Capital One (Lowell) £2182.45 Cleared - June 2010 - No credit agreement

Yes Car Credit (Go Debt) £7143.70 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

HSBC (Lowell/Red) £8476.37 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

Tesco Loan PPI £2668 - March 2013 - Refund

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should write to them and find out why the difference in the offer.

 

Tesco are being a bit naughty with PPI refunds, unless you can provide statements/other proof that PPI was applied to the account further back than 6 years, they wont refund it.

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

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe that was the reason, because it was from 2003 and the interest was £975 in the first offer

They said they have sent out the new offer but havent received it yet

T Mobile (Red) £194.58 Cleared - November 2008 - Statute Barred

Capital One (Lowell) £2182.45 Cleared - June 2010 - No credit agreement

Yes Car Credit (Go Debt) £7143.70 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

HSBC (Lowell/Red) £8476.37 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

Tesco Loan PPI £2668 - March 2013 - Refund

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely they have to honour the first offer though?

T Mobile (Red) £194.58 Cleared - November 2008 - Statute Barred

Capital One (Lowell) £2182.45 Cleared - June 2010 - No credit agreement

Yes Car Credit (Go Debt) £7143.70 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

HSBC (Lowell/Red) £8476.37 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

Tesco Loan PPI £2668 - March 2013 - Refund

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you no sar'd them to get all the paperwork so YOU can workout what you should get?

 

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

No,

it was a bit confusing,

because the credit was provided by RBS

but the loan was actually taken out with Tesco,

 

when we fell into arrears tesco and RBS passed the book back and forth

and it was a nightmare to get anywhere with them.

 

They eventually put a charging order on our house which was paid back when we sold the house.

 

The court paperwork said RBS,

so we initially sent a SAR to RBS with a £10 postal order

as we had no other information other than the court ref numbers,

 

after several letters they told us we needed to write to Tesco,

so we just sent a letter and the standard PPI questionairre as we didnt want to send another £10 to get no where again.

 

The actual offer is much more than we expected,

but how can they now decide due to an 'admin error'

they want to offer £400 less surely they have to honour the initial offer?

T Mobile (Red) £194.58 Cleared - November 2008 - Statute Barred

Capital One (Lowell) £2182.45 Cleared - June 2010 - No credit agreement

Yes Car Credit (Go Debt) £7143.70 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

HSBC (Lowell/Red) £8476.37 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

Tesco Loan PPI £2668 - March 2013 - Refund

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you need to SEE the paperwork they are relying upon

 

they must have it

 

else how can they make a revised offer?

 

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

I guess i should wait until the revised offer letter comes in and see what it says, they said they sent it on 28th feb, but havent had it yet.

T Mobile (Red) £194.58 Cleared - November 2008 - Statute Barred

Capital One (Lowell) £2182.45 Cleared - June 2010 - No credit agreement

Yes Car Credit (Go Debt) £7143.70 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

HSBC (Lowell/Red) £8476.37 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

Tesco Loan PPI £2668 - March 2013 - Refund

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

what does that acheive?

 

you still wont be about to calculate what you SHOULD GET.

 

fire an SAR off

 

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

They have 40 days to reply to the SAR and we have 28 days to accept their offer?

T Mobile (Red) £194.58 Cleared - November 2008 - Statute Barred

Capital One (Lowell) £2182.45 Cleared - June 2010 - No credit agreement

Yes Car Credit (Go Debt) £7143.70 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

HSBC (Lowell/Red) £8476.37 Cleared - July 2010 - Statute Barred

Tesco Loan PPI £2668 - March 2013 - Refund

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

enc a letter with the sar refering to the fact that you are unsure

IF their redress is correct as they have chagned it

and wish sight of the documents they are relying upon

before accepting the reduced offer

 

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...