Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

CW Harwood & Co/Redwood Collections old lloyds/amazon Credit Card 'debt'


technician483
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3801 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

Well I'm after some advice again!

 

My girlfriend has just received 2 letters in quick succession from CW Harwood & Co claiming

to be acting on behalf of Redwood Collections.

 

They are chasing an alleged debt of £3886.35 that was owed as far as we can make out

to Lloyds Banking Group originally for an Amazon credit card.

 

 

The debt has been passed around but we now believe from her credit report

that the debt was actually satisfied back in 2009 in full.

 

The latest letter states they are now

"seeking instructions to pursue this matter through the county court process following your failure to settle this debt."

 

They go on "Payment in full must be made to Redwood Collections Limited

within seven days to prevent such action being taken."

 

I really don't want this to end up in court.

 

 

How can I prove the debt was paid or at least prevent them from taking her to court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you checked her credit report?

Does this appear on there at all?

 

DON'T contact them yet, there arbitrary time limits are only there to get you to panic and pay money you don't owe!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We checked her credit report.

 

 

At first nothing was on there at all with regard this debt.

 

 

Then when we phoned to cancel the monthly credit report charges they suddenly came up with this debt.

 

 

Apparently it was from a previous address and they couldn't show it on the report until they'd verified her address.

 

When it appeared the operator at Experian said the debt had been satisfied back in 2009 in full,

but that it now appeared again as another debt but for exactly the same amount!

Link to post
Share on other sites

so its showing twice?

 

 

that's typical if its been sold and a debt buyer has got there hands on it.

 

 

the fact that it shows £0 settled

will just be the OC writing the debt off against tax and selling it on a phishing list.

 

 

might be best to fire them off a CCa request.

 

 

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

just be a bit careful

 

 

redwoods are ex 1st credit/connault collections staff/ managers.

 

 

they have a NASTY habit of purposefully serving statutory demands to old addresses

 

 

however a they have your current address

 

 

they'd be silly to do that!

 

 

they also chase statute barred debts

 

 

but as you say? its well old but not 6yrs from last payment?

 

 

is their details of the last payment on the cra file info?

 

 

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've just checked her credit report again.

 

 

It seems to have changed and

 

 

now only shows this debt once.

 

 

It is shown as being an IND Limited debt for £3886.00.

 

 

Default date is listed as 10/09/2009.

 

 

I know for a fact that even if the debt is legitimate she won't have paid anything or acknowledged the debt since January 2009.

 

The strange thing is that when we phoned Experian to cancel her monthly debit with them,

they were adamant this debt had been settled in full, not just sold on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

opps be very careful if IND have got it.

 

 

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

IND for the CCA.

 

As to Experian often a creditor just e ters that a debt is 'settled' without qualifying how it was settled or by whom.

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

Who should I send a SAR to, as I'd like to get to the bottom of this alleged debt. Should it be to the originator of the debt, Lloyds?

 

To the original creditor Lloyds a DCA will only have date from the date it acquired an account.

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

you don't need too

you could send them a cca request too if you like

 

 

tie them both up in knots!!

 

 

just remember they are a dca

 

 

DCA@s are NOT BAILIFFS

 

 

they have

 

 

NO SUCH LEGAL POWERS

 

 

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...