Jump to content


Legalcare and GPB making demands


gd47
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3822 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've started receiving 'threat-o-grams' from GPB re: LegalCare.

The 'legal advice' I received from them was utterly useless and I cancelled via Paypal the same day.

I was under the assumption that the advice was going to be from a qualified solicitor, which it obviously wasn't.

Unfortunately for GPB, I'm fairly confident that I can put across a solid case against paying a single penny to this thoroughly unscrupulous company (LegalCare, that is...certainly not GPB, who I'm sure are paragons of virtue!).

Oh, and I'll also contact Watchdog, Trading Standards and anyone else I can think of!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's my reply...

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

(Well, that's how you referred to me, despite my name being George...perhaps you read "The Famous Five" at one point in your sad life?).

 

Actually, it's ME who should be taking action against YOUR client for purporting to offer me "legal" advice.

 

The so-called "legal" advice was not even from a qualified solicitor.

 

Irrespective it was garbage, I cancelled my "subscription" immediately via PayPal (which, as you are no doubt aware, is completely in accordance with the ruling deliverd by Mr Justice Kitchen in the case of OFT v Ashbourne Management Services Ltd).

 

Incidentally, your client LegalCare is involved in a MLM business which is possibly on the very fringe of UK legallty. Check this link, should you have any doubts: http://10pstreet.co.uk/legal-care/

 

Should you wish to pursue this matter further, then by all means proceed.

 

If you choose to do so , then I would respectfully bring to your attention the reply in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram (1971), which I would rely upon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gd,

 

Your posts have been moved into your own thread.

 

Please keep us informed of any developments on this.

 

:-)

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that's possibly some good news!

Who will LegalCare turn to now?

Surely not SDK law, because if so, there is a conflict of interest issue.

 

Anyway, I'll keep everyone informed of any further developments.

 

Oh, and many thanks slick132 for creating a new thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...