Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • CPR is in post 5 click it add relevant pers details print and send to qdr   do NOT SIGN IT
    • wow will look into the points you raise now.  I didn't know that about the paralegal.  The last two times ( lowell and the parking fine for my friend) they just had a local solicitor representing the company certainly not the person who made out the witness statement.
    • win or lose defaults/credit files are nothing to do with courts.   your lowells WS was very good and this one just a bit too sparse on what you are trying to say IMHO too many points just listing a diary even of this or that happening. might pay you to slightly change it and use yours to rip theirs apart.   like say point 4...load of ole waffle trying to hide the fact that the CCA hasn't come from Barclaycard at all but from their filing cabinet and is a cut n paste jobbie.   im also a bit sceptical about the default notice and IS it a copy, there a mailmerge line above the address box and it just doesn't look right. check the balance at that date ib their statements, does it match £36??   I also don't like their points 9/10/22 relating to it. they quote 2 sets of page numbers referring to where in the bundle its located?   21 don't forget to rebuff carey as not applicable   lastly. I believe that paralegal must be in court so they can be cross examined by you and answer questions? else it can't be referred too?      
    • I've done some work to the section I'll paste below. (obviously the section numbers will change) These points are all supported by EXHIBIT A1 which I will attach here.          ENTRANCE TO CAR PARK   1.            On [DATE] the defendant visited Pizza Hut with a party of friends. The defendant was not the driver of the vehicle. The vehicle travelled along North Ormesby Road, turned right onto Woodside Street and sharp left into the parking area in front of Pizza Hut. This is the most obvious and direct route to Pizza Hut. See Exhibit A1 for details.   2.      There were no signs pertaining to the claims of the claimant visible to the driver of the vehicle on the route set out in Exhibit A1   3.      Taking the route laid out in Exhibit A1 clearly results in the act of “parking”. It must therefore follow that the vehicle has “entered” the car park. This entrance must be located either at the point of leaving North Ormesby Road and entering Woodland Street or else it is at the point of leaving Woodlands Street and entering the parking area.   4.      These two possible locations of the entrance are shown in Exhibit A1. Whichever is the case neither location has a sign at the entrance to the car park. It is therefore not possible that the defendant entered into a contract with the claimant.   5.      Neither location that may be considered the “entrance” to the car park bears a sign erected by the claimant.   6.      There were no signs erected by the claimant visible to pedestrians as the party left the vehicle and entered Pizza Hut. Exhibit-A1.pdf
    • Just a quick update.   Erudio Student Loans returned my £1 postal order that I had sent them for the CCA request. They sent a letter saying "Thank you for your correspondence but your account has been terminated and is now with Dryden's Fairfax Solicitors."   Dryden's sent me a letter regarding the CPR saying that they are waiting for documentation from their client, and offering me a further 28 day extension to file my defence (I've already filed it - don't worry!) Dryden's then sent another letter acknowledging my defence and saying they would seek their client's instructions. I've not attached the letters as they seem fairly standard - but I can do if you want me to.
  • Our picks

Hampsa

Cash4Phones - Trading company name change and other things I have done

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2259 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

They have changed their registered name that Cash4Phones were trading under

C4P Trading Limited to Yemonia LIMITED and

 

moved from EC2 to W2 (although their C4P Trading Limited site shows this as the registered company name

and not Yemoniaicon LIMITED as showing on webcheck on the companies house site

http://www.cash4phones.co.uk/corporate/contact-us.aspx).

 

I have been waiting since 11th of October to be paid £132.40 and

 

they are now ignoring my emails and no one picks up their phone.

 

Had started small claims court:mad2: Proceeding but cannot enforce judgement as don't know where they are now and

 

I also don't want to waste any more money unless I have too.

 

have put in a complaint to Watchdog about their new [problem] about not paying,

 

Watchdog had ran the original 'excessive wear and tear' [problem] which I found yesterday

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006.../cash-4-phones.

 

I have also contacted ActionFraud and put in a case so have a crime reference number,

 

I do hope that this action,

 

if enough people do this,

 

results in the owners being arrested and their business being closed down.

 

As for re-claiming any money am not confidant any longer and has already cost me another £25 to put a claim in the small claims court,

 

am told will cost even more if judgement has been approved and then I try to enforce...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

might be fun to let HCEO's deal with the judgement

it'll cost you £60 I think

 

but they don't give up!

 

[like that lot on call in the sheriffs programme ]

 

dx


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks dx, will look into this:lol:; don't understand why Trading Standards have not shut them down:mad2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

like any big company they have issues

but

you must take this in prospective...

 

if you have a quick view of the successes thread on the telecom home page

 

you'll see lee normally resolves 99/100 issues.

 

hes a busy lad

 

give him time.

 

dx


..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...