chezt v's Littlewoods Catalogue **I WON**

[bill-k]

Notice of issue in post this morning - Littlewoods have till 10th December to reply - thought it was 14 days they got never mind the clock is again ticking ...

 

Any answers to my last post?

 

Hi Chezt - nuisance here !!! Just clicked in on this one after I realised how many balls you're juggling, matey !! You've now got yourself a dedicated stalker !!

 

Q1:- I don't use MCOL, but the snailmail ones I get state Date of Issue, then date Deemed Served, usually 2-3 days after. Service date is the start of the countdown, though, and if they're busy then this could be somewhat later, perhaps.

 

Q2:- Not sure as I haven't read your POC, but if you said you'd do something in them, then you'd better do it. Yeah, send a further update - it keeps it wafting under their noses !! A reminder to them that the stalling tactics haven't shaken you off.

 

I assume you're claiming penalty charges here. FWIW, I had a claim with them a coupla years back (back in the pre-CAG Dark Ages). They refused to pay commission until Mrs. K had signed a new contract. Apart from the dosh, it was the principle (yeah, I know: "Principled - moi ?"). Stephanie Coulthard was the solicitor I was dealing with then. She filed Intention to Defend, but did sod-all, so I got Default Judgement. But she took it to the wire, as they do. I think we got about £200 for what was originally about £80 commission. More details if you want them (and if I can still find them !)

 

"No-quibble guarantee ?" - yeah, right...

 

Littlewoods would.

[bill-k]

 

Oh n Yeah - I'm juggling plenty of balls ATM !! just hope I don't drop any!

 

Yeh - dropped one myself occasionally (tho' not in court). One just has to pick up & walk away with an embarrassed grin & whistle !!

 

FWIW - I have one on the go with Empire Stores (aka Redcats). It's just a single £15 admin charge, but it's now costing the silly bugga's nearly £60 !!

 

Have you read the posts on the CAG rally thread ? Hilarious. Wish I'd been there.

 

There's a petition going round, too. I'll try and put a link in my sig.

[bill-k]

Hi Chezt - apologies for absence. Been a bit under the weather. Got one of them bugs that has you sittin' on the loo with yer head in the sink !!

Too much info, you say ? You shoulda been standin' outside listening !!

 

...I'd give it 5 minutes if I were you :o

 

Firstly, apologies for jumping to answer you on Glenn's "Contractual Interest ?" thread. Couldn't help it, but I think it meant Glenn won't answer - even though I invited him to take a pop at me. I reckon he's abandoned that one since we all hi-jacked it a while back. Either that, or he refuses to associate himself with a thread that's got me in it anywhere !! Then I went and promised you Mindzai's POC's and failed to deliver. I'll PM you with them (again !!), as they're good, I reckon. Well worth considering before you finalise.

 

I mustn't comment on POC's, really, as they have to be just right, and should be checked by a proper legal eagle. Hopefully, Bookie might do it for you. I see she answered your MCOL query, and I agree with her "wild guess" about intention to defend - no bl**dy intention whatsoever, but it gets 'em another 14 days for free !!!

 

If Bookie can't, then maybe try PM-ing Glenn to force a response. Tell him you asked me, but my answer was $h1te, and he'll probably jump at the chance. No, seriously - good guy - and I think, as you say, the Contractual King.

 

Regarding snailmail N1 forms. I found it easiest (for me) to do this:

 

Print 3 copies of my Schedule of Charges spready.

 

Put my detailed POC in a Word doc. and save. Print 3 copies - mine took a side of A4, using size 10 print.

 

Look up all the info I'm gonna need for my N1 side 1 answers and save them in a simple text file. Court & Defendants name & addr., Brief particulars, Amount claimed.

 

Open a new N1 pdf file & fill in, using the above txt file (paste & copy or just refer) Don't forget side 2 - you need to tick the Human Rights box at top, and print your name at bottom. For detailed particulars, I usually print "Attached"

 

Now print off 3 copies of side 1 ( I switch colour off), shove them back in the printer (a$$ about face, of course) and then print 3 copies of side 2 on the reverse (if you've got it right !!)

 

Now delete as required (by pen) on side 2 and sign, then staple into 3 sets of 3 sheets.

 

As you can't actually save the completed pdf N1 file, you might want to scan and save both sides of one of your completed N1's.

 

You've got a saved copy of everything now, just in case.

 

Send all 3 sets to the SCC. Or take in, if it's your local SCC.

 

Hope that's of use, matey, and not too late !!

 

Bill.

[bill-k]

why do u send 3 copies to cc?

 

Thanks again for helpin .. hope ur feelin better soon

 

Cheers, Chezt - better, now, ta. I've still got a dose of "Nottingham Nut."

 

What's that you ask ?

 

"Throbbin' 'ead, throbbin' 'ead, riding through the glen..."

 

Re the N1 copies - had a discuss with Doryphor on this. I use the N1 and N1a, as downloaded as pdf's from the HMCS site. I then post all my claims to the CC local to the defendants' head office. Now, the N1a definitely says send in three copies - 1 for defendant, 1 for court and 1 for claimant. The courts always send me back my copy, duly stamped & dated. Dory, however, says he takes his in to his local CC, and they just take 2 copies from him. He says he might do 3 next time, so's he gets a "receipt" in the form of his one, duly stamped.

 

In my dealings with court clerks so far, I personally would INSIST on a receipt !! I think he sees my reasoning !!

[bill-k]

OKEY DOKEY ..... UPDATE!!!!!

 

Letter from Littlewoods (Finance Company Limited this time!)

 

here goes ... see what u think ....

 

'Further to our letter of DATE ( u mean from your solicitor ....u never replied!) apoligies for delay in replying blah blah.

 

I have now reviewed all activity on your account over the period xxxxx. According to our records you have set up a number of payment arrangements during this time, some of which have not been paid as agreed. This will result in a letter being produces & an admin charge being made to your account (er yeah I've seen that!)

 

They then go on to tell me how naughty I've been & when and how much they have charged me for doing so! one n a half pages full!! My schedule is shorter! (Dunno what all this is about?!?!?!)

 

They go on ... We believe we have gone to considerable lengths to reduce the risk of you incurring a default charge including sending at least one reminder before default charges are applied (don't remember that ... just appeared as a charge on the acc as far as I remember) We are satisfied that, when considered in the context of the steps we take to reduce the occasions on which the charge is incurred, the frequency and nature of the defaults for which a charge is made & the level of the charges themselves, the admin charges applied to your acc are entirely fair & reasonable (wondered when they were gonna get that one in!)

 

We are aware of the statement of the OFT's position regarding fair charges. For the reasons given above, we are satisfied that the charges applied to your acc are justifiable in accordance with the views of the OFT & are fair within the Unfair Terms in consumer contracts regulations.

 

in the circumstances, the company is not prepared to remove all charges applied to your acc as requested.

 

i confirm this letter concludes our investigations into your complaint. I trust our explanation meets with your satisfaction.

 

OK ... Comments PLEASE!! Bearing in mind I've alread filed MCOL on this & this was issued 21st Nov ... they have until 10th dec to reply ... so is this it? Is this their reply or should they be replying to the court? The letter is just addressed to me & no cc mentioned anywhere ....

 

Hi Chez,

 

I reckon this is what might be termed a "pre-court sod-off" !!! They deserve like-for-like in reply !! They haven't acknowledged your MCOL claim in this, it seems, but they must have had it. They know the clock's now ticking on this, and they're hoping you're their favourite "Little Mrs. Easily-Intimidated Housewife," and that you'll bottle out.

 

I just lurve the way that they try and tell you that, because they have done this so many times with your account, it justifies doing it. Like saying "Excuse me, but I've successfully mugged the same person twenty times so far, with no complaints, so it must be OK to do that." !!

 

I would enjoy sending them a polite-but-arsey reply on the lines of "Thanks for admitting how many times you have committed this offence, but you haven't explained how you think that makes it OK. Therefore...left with no choice but to MCOL...claim still stands...please check with company litigation dept before sending any more of this brainless cr@p. "

 

Stephanie Coulthard was the co. solicitor I dealt with 2-3 years back, but see who gets back to you first, really.

 

As AlanFromDerby would say "Clock's ticking again - time to turn the screw..." I love that guy !!

 

They have ignored mentioning it in their letter, so just keep the MCOL claim chugging, I reckon. After all, what's changed ?

[bill-k]

Where is it - Liverpool ?

 

I just noticed they're using a trainee. I reckon they've had to get some in to deal with the workload, then !!

 

Poor kid - giver him/her an education !!

[bill-k]

Does it say Northampton?

 

That's where MCOL is based, it then gets passed to your local court. You should know this by now, it is in the FAQs and step-by-step.

 

 

 

Like I said it would.

 

Ok, just to wait for their defence then. Make sure you post it in full (blanking out your identifying markers, of course) here, so we can all have a good look.

 

Sorry, I don't use MCOL myself, so I'm unfamiliar with their procedure.

 

Yes, you gotta wait the time, but I suspect their defence will read something like this:-

 

" "

 

But post it anyway !!!

[bill-k]

Lisa - that's an interesting bit of info !! It's certainly worth a quid.

 

But is that really so about the debt being unenforceable if they can't supply the signed contract ?

 

I thought that simply making a purchase from them implied your agreement to the contract, and that this, effectively, becomes your signature.

 

Have you got a thread on this (I'll look for it anyway) - and can you post a link here ?

 

Thanks

 

Bill.

[bill-k]

here is a link for my thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-consumer-issues/32080-my-mums-catalogue-bill.html

 

lisaxx

Thanks Lisa - that thread's knocked me out !!

[bill-k]

--

[bill-k]

Chez, sorry - I dunno what happened earlier - I'm losin' it I guess !!

Like you, I saw several versions of the letter posted. I noticed in one thread, there was the polite one, followed immediately by Rooster's more robust version.

 

FWIW I ended up doing an amalgam of the two, if this is any use (no snidey stuff this time tho ) :-

Consumer Credit Act 1974 s78 (1) Demand

Dear Sir/Madam

Unintelligent Finance - Account No:

Please supply me with a true copy of the credit agreement under which this account is conducted.

 

This is my right under your obligation to supply a copy of the agreement under the legislation contained within s.78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 (s.78 (1)

for running – account credit).

 

Your obligation also extends to providing a statement of account.

 

I enclose a £1 cheque in payment of the statutory fee.

 

As a member of the Consumer Action Group, I am aware that you are obliged to supply these documents within 12 days, under S189 of the

Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bill-k.

 

Encl: £1.00 Cheque no:

[bill-k]

* little bump!*

 

Aaaaw - congratulations !!

[bill-k]

Bill i'm a bit confused with all the S's!! The letters I've seen quote Act 1974 (Sections 77−79) too .... is this all relevant .. I'm confused???

 

Also, do I have to send payment by postal order or can I just send a cheque???

I must admit, Chez - I've not actually read the relevant Sections of the Act - and I really should have done before sending my request. I just copied & pasted Rooster's text.

 

Cheque is OK - but beware - they MIGHT just pay the £1 into your account !!

[bill-k]

You're right, Chez. We need Bookie for this !!

 

FWIW, the little run-in I had with Littlewoods a coupla years back was centred on their refusal to pay Mrs K's commission unless she signed a new agreement with the new firm that Littlewoods had become. We refused on principle. Main thrust was that the commission was earned under the former agreement and any new agreement was a separate matter. Won, plus misc charges., but had to issue a claim first. Can you remember signing a new agreement with them? That is what all this stuff in para. 2 is about, I think.

 

In paras 3 & 4, they seem to be implying that, as you hadn't specified WHICH Littlewoods you were suing, that they could literally lead you a merry dance. I think you might need to identify WHICH Littlewoods you are suing. If you did sign a new agreement, then I reckon these charges were imposed by the original Littlewoods. If not, then by whoever your agreement is with.

 

It certainly looks as though the main thrust of their defence is that you failed to be precise enough in your particulars (para. 8 ). So they're playing the "clever buggers" card, eh ? It seems to me that, as a Personal Litigant, you have a Joker in your hand, and that might be the key. Their "clever buggers" defence seems to reinforce the possibility of "concealment."

 

...and para. 23 seems to invite Standard Disclosure to me !!!!

 

Bookie !..................BOOKIE !!...................!!!!

[bill-k]

Yo, Chez - I been there 'n' dun that !! We get so carried away with our other claims, we forget who we're squaring up against !! Good for Bookie for clarifying that !!!

 

I guess we're gonna have to refer to the CCA's here, aren't we ?

 

Er.....Bookie ?

 

No. Mustn't pester her too much. better read up other threads to see what's what, first. Must admit - apart from my earlier skirmish with 'em, I can't help here with factuals. But get some half-decent relevant clauses together, and they'll fold, I'm sure, matey !!

[bill-k]

Sorry I can't help much here, Chez. I dunno if Willowb can help - she's done a lot of this stuff, I think. Haven't seen her around, lately, tho.

[bill-k]

OK quick Q ... This claim has been transferred to a local court but where I live there are 2 near me & I would prefer to go to the other one as I know the area more ... do you think it would be acceptable to ask for the location of the hearing to be transferred or will this be deemed as being a bit petty?

Seems no harm in asking, Chez, I guess - but really - think about it - are they gonna go that far, anyway ??

 

Might be best to let it lie.

[bill-k]

LW tried to force Mrs K to sign a new agreement with them a few years back. Are you sure they didn't do that to you ?

 

If not, then it sounds like they don't have a contract !!!

[bill-k]

Well done, Chez - I'll be coming to you for advice soon, as I haven't done AQ, yet, and I have a couple now. Time to return some of those kind clicks at last, methinks !!

 

I'm pretty sure that, if you have been getting corre from their solicitors, then you stay in that vein until told otherwise. Littlewoods are in-house anyway, I think, so it doesn't matter too much, I shouldn't think.

[bill-k]

At a guess....falling Outta My Tree Laughing???

 

Nite all:)

 

Yeah you got it Willow !! She's sharp after a glass or 2, eh ? And here's us lot tryina stay sober so we can still get what's goin' on !!

 

So...what DOES Ndiwe mean, clever-knickers ??

[bill-k]

FOMTL Willow !!

 

NDIWE indeed !! That's a better translation than my Zulu version !!

 

The spotty knickers have spoken !!

 

Pardon you !!! :o

[bill-k]

Like Dr Who's Tardis, perhaps ??

 

OMG - run for cover , everybody !!!

 

Greenpeace - where are you - this gorilla's facing personal extinction !

[bill-k]

I notice actually, that you can't take your eyes off them! ....or maybe you are looking up to heaven! lol

...whilst lying in the gutter !! ??

LOL!!!!!!!!! No I won't! the avatar stays:D ....he'll just have to avoid posting under me! ......I may just sit down:eek:

...aaaaaarghmmmmfffff !!

[bill-k]

HAHA! PMSL ...well spotted! Prapr u oughta ... do our old ( ) Gorilla mate a favour before he goes blind or summat!!

 

Grrrrrrrrrrrrr !!

 

...but that is the nicest case of acne I've seen in a long time !!

[bill-k]

Blimey Royal Mail excelled 'emselves, eh ?

 

I'm not sure, it might have been TideTurner, was saying that sending Recorded to these firms is just pants , as they have sacks of mail sometimes, and whole bunches of Recorded's. They often just give one sig for the lot, and the postie just doesn't bother entering the trackback details in for each & every one. It's a [problem], 'cos they get a quid for each one of those Recorded's in the bunch.

 

He recommends just getting a Certificate of Posting is good enough. Apparently proof of posting is good enough for the courts. After all, they just use standard 1st class post, don't they ?

 

Getting somewhere at last, tho' Chez. Excellent stuff.