Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So 2 days following the warrant issue.. Hermes finally contacted me to arrange payment and said they had not received my prior claim letters hence the lack of response? But they received this one though didn’t they before the bailiffs are in!   Am incredibly pleased and thankful to CAG! I didn’t know this great  community would be what I find back in Dec from a quick search! Really appreciate the time taken to help me on this and I wouldn’t have a clue without it! I have just donated. Its forums like these that really makes a difference to society, so we need to keep it going!   Key points to note: Hermes Parcelnet Limited (UK entity and HQ in Leeds - address to this) Don’t use packlink for high value items (it links ebay details to the courier selected) Never use Hermes for high value items EVER!
    • ???   you ignore them until they comply and we confirm the filing cabinet copy and paste bogroll they send IS enforceable. cause i bet you 100% it won't have come from them awaiting the OC to send it....their raiding their filing cabinets now i bet..
    • Still waiting for these diagrams. We've been dealing with this story for nearly 48 hours now and we are only starting to understand exactly what happened and we still haven't got information that we've asked for.  
    • Dx100uk well not really, considering he pulled out on me from the side of the road. He should have gave way. Why do you think he has told a different story to his insurance ?   Because he knows if he has said he pulled out on me he would be held liable.   He pulled away from my left hand side then braked- leaving his van in an angled position, it literally happened within the space of a split second  
    • Update: the lawyer friend sent a very good legal letter last week  The third letter will be sent over the next few days - here is the proposed text - your comments welcome as ever: Dear Will & John Letter Reference:xxxx I write with reference to your recent letter in relation to PCN numberxxxxx You threaten Court proceeding on behalf of your client yet your client’s rationale for charging me has no legal substance. An alleged parking offence as a breach of an alleged contract.  I have no contract or terms and conditions with your client.   Furthermore, the sum you are requesting is fictitious. I have no intention of paying any monies to your client. You had no legitimate reason to access my personal details so are already in breach of GDPR by texting me several times on my personal number which I have not given permission for you to use.  Coupled with the several letters you have sent your persistence amounts to nothing short of harassment. Should this continue I will have no hesitation in contacting the ICO to report the breach. The letters I have received will be useful as tinder for the open fire in my living room now the weather has turned cold again. Should you wish to take me to court, I will be seeking full costs through a recovery order under CPR 27:14 which will come in handy now I find myself in the unenviable position of redundancy as a result of Covid. Yours Sincerely   Copied to PCM UK "you don't want to be Gladstoned"   Thanks AJJM
  • 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
      • 33 replies
  • Recommended Topics

Defaults and Credit Checks on prospective employee


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2884 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

Hi there.

 

I don't know if I am posting in the right forum, hopefully a moderator can help me if not.

 

This is bit of a long story so please bear with me. I got made redundant through no fault of my own September last year and have been on Jobseekers Allowance since then. Everyone knows that when you have a job you have a better lifestyle, and when you lose that job, the lifestyle dramatically changes and you cannot afford the little luxuries anymore, this is where defaults start happening on your credit file and start to get harassed by the DCAs.

 

Anyway, I was placed on a 2 week course with a provider called Working Links. I was told that if I completed the course to their satisfaction, I would be guaranteed a job interview whether in person or phone with the Student Loans Company. Apparently they do CRB checks, person checks and credit checks even though it is a temporary admin job. (talk about paranoia and the snoopers charter). I have an Enhanced CRB which is clean so that isn't a problem.

 

I mentioned in the first instance on the course that we, as unemployed people who had lost their jobs recently would not have squeaky clean or positively glowing credit histories and if their selection process was so rigourous, why on earth are they recruiting this way. I was told as long as debts were being paid, everything will be fine.

 

Now this is the gist of my problem. I have defaults and a CCJ, all but two are being addressed, the two I am in dispute with consist of:-

 

One is a mobile phone where a DCA added an extra £300 to the balance, I have requested all paper work and everything associated with it but they will not give me this information. Secondly, a credit card to Vanquis Bank. The card had payment protection on it (or whatever version of payment protection they call it) and have refused to acknowlege it and have sent Moorcroft after me, I said to them that I would not pay anything to them when payments were supposed to be protected for 2 years.

 

So the course finished, got glowing reports and going forward to next stage. However, the course manager phoned me today and the subject of the credit check came up. he said don't mention your defaults on the phone as they will turn you down flat. I said what the hell, I told you about my defaults and my situation, why on earth did you let me finish this course if I had no chance of the end result.

 

Heres my quandary, should I just make the creditors I am in dispute with a token offer and hope for the best as this is not a guaranteed job offer, just an interview, or just totally forget about the interview and carry on being in dispute with those two creditors. And explain to the JC+ that my credit record prevented me. Otherwise I could be admitting to these debts and still have no job.

 

So sorry for the long post. Has anyone out there on CAG been in the same position and can help me out?

 

Many thanks jb000

Edited by jb000
Link to post
Share on other sites

As this is an admin role they may be OK with you if you are honest. You do need to be honest! Tell them upfront and see what happens; ignore the suggestion of sins of omission as there is now way SLC will not find out.

 

Continue to treat your creditors as you are, token payments make no difference if you already have a ccj.

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites
As this is an admin role they may be OK with you if you are honest. You do need to be honest! Tell them upfront and see what happens; ignore the suggestion of sins of omission as there is now way SLC will not find out.

 

Continue to treat your creditors as you are, token payments make no difference if you already have a ccj.

 

Hi there, the CCJ is a water debt and is being paid monthly at £1 per month. One default is car HP which I am paying back at £2 per month. It's just these other 2 creditors that are the problem.

 

In total I have 1 CCJ and 3 defaults. Sorry I should have mentioned that along with being an admin role it could be possibly call centre work as well.

Edited by jb000
Link to post
Share on other sites

A ccj is a ccj.... Doesn't matter how you repay them. Seen as the more serious kind of debt. Really the other stuff won't make the situation much worse.

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.

 

I think I will phone the course manager on Monday to seek further clarification on these mixed messages as the tutor said that if you are paying toward the debt you are OK, but the manager said if you have a default they will not entertain you. I will inform of the outcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The defaults will also stay on your file for six years even if you were to make a token offer.

 

Agree about the fact that it seems strange to allow you to proceed even knowing of your financial situation!

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
The defaults will also stay on your file for six years even if you were to make a token offer.

 

Agree about the fact that it seems strange to allow you to proceed even knowing of your financial situation!

 

That is my whole point. If I find out that I have been wasting my time on this course for 2 weeks instead of using the time more constructively looking for jobs with less stringent checks then I will be giving Working Links and my JSA signing on advisor what for. I will also be sending a very stiff letter to the Managing Director of the Student Loans Company as to why are they using this method of recruitment when the majority of people I spoke to on this course would not pass this excessive recruitment criteria as they were in more or less the same position as me.

Edited by jb000
Link to post
Share on other sites

The training companies lie to get you on the course, and will advise you to lie if they think it'll get you a job because then they get a bonus.

 

So ignore whatever lies they tell you to come up with; it's you that looks like a liar with the employer.

 

At the least I guess you have some recent office experience to show for it, and have jumped though a job centre hoop...

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites
The training companies lie to get you on the course, and will advise you to lie if they think it'll get you a job because then they get a bonus.

 

So ignore whatever lies they tell you to come up with; it's you that looks like a liar with the employer.

 

At the least I guess you have some recent office experience to show for it, and have jumped though a job centre hoop...

 

Yes it was part of a jobcentre thing, and in my part of the country jobs are very very hard to come by at the moment. I am seeing graduates and other highly qualified persons going for the basic jobs and the less qualified have virtually no chance at the moment.

 

What has made me really angry is that I made a 60 mile round trip every day for 2 weeks to be on this course and I ended up out of pocket on one or two occasions because one of the tutors moaned about the mileage. And if I had walked off the course, my benefit payment could have been called into question.

 

I have been doing some research on the SLC and they are not regulated by the FSA and do not have adhere to their procedures. After all, does anybody need credit checking and a medical to work sorting out post and scanning documents onto a computer.

 

You're right I certainly wouldn't lie about it. I am an honest bloke with many years of unblemished service at work. But it boils my blood to be treated as a potential thief or fraudster by these tin pot companies just because I got made redundant through no fault of my own and my finances went awry.

Edited by jb000
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I think that is an entirely different question to whether the training provider was at fault....

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I think that is an entirely different question to whether the training provider was at fault....

 

The Student Loans Company should not be entering into these partnerships with these training providers dealing with disadvantaged people if they set their recruitment standards bar so high. They should be looking elsewhere for the beautiful people.

 

This course was for unemployed people who have been unemployed for 6 months or more and at a disadvantage. Looking at it now in the cold light of day I feel as if I have been duped.

 

However, I am not one to take things lying down especially if someone has taken the p*** out of me, there will be repercussions with both SLC and WL.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Student Loans Company should not be entering into these partnerships with these training providers dealing with disadvantaged people if they set their recruitment standards bar so high. They should be looking elsewhere for the beautiful people.

 

I know many unemployed people who have never had credit so never had a poor credit file. I know many people on high salaries who pay late because they spend it like water.

 

You can't judge everyone by your own circumstances. You *can* suggest a better pre-filter to the job centre.

 

"Financial position" is not a protected characteristic to employ or not employ people. I don't see what further action you can take, and I suggest calming down a bit!

Never assume anyone on the internet is who they say they are. Only rely on advice from insured professionals you have paid for!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I know many unemployed people who have never had credit so never had a poor credit file. I know many people on high salaries who pay late because they spend it like water.

 

You can't judge everyone by your own circumstances. You *can* suggest a better pre-filter to the job centre.

 

"Financial position" is not a protected characteristic to employ or not employ people. I don't see what further action you can take, and I suggest calming down a bit!

 

I take your points. I am usually a level headed bloke who rarely gets annoyed, but somehow strangely this situation has angered me beyond belief.

 

Anyway, there is nothing I can do about it until they get back in touch. I will inform the forum of any further developments when they happen.

 

jb000

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...