Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The issue happened in February 2021 though, so still under warranty officially and I would have been happy with a replacement
    • £200 voucher is a bit much to simply write off.   you are not obliged to accept a voucher.   write again to the retailer , stating you wish the retailer to returned your original payment to the card you purchased the item with. else you will confirm with the card issuer to go ahead with a section 75 claim. 
    • Following your letters of 7 and 9 May 2021, I’m now in a position to respond in full.   I’m sorry to learn of your concerns about being asked for verification in order for Aviva to fulfil your recent Data Subject Access Request (DSAR).   Aviva has a requirement to verify all requests to ensure that we only disclose personal data to the person who is entitled to receive it. Unfortunately, on this occasion we requested ID where it was not required as you had already supplied the information needed. I agree this shouldn’t have happened and I’m sorry for the concern and inconvenience caused. Please be assured feedback has been given to the relevant representative to ensure more care is taken in future when vetting requests.   Please be assured your DSAR will be with you by the 26 May 2021 as per the legal requirement to fulfil your request by this date.   For clarity, the complaint I am responding to is in relation to your Data Subject Access Request (DSAR) which is logged under reference CER/XXX. This is separate from your complaint about the motor insurance policy, which I can see the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) have provided their final response to and I’m therefore unable to comment on the points you’ve raised in respect of this matter.   I hope you are satisfied with my response, however if you are unhappy, you can refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge – but you must do so within six months of the date of this email.   If you do not refer your complaint in time, the Ombudsman will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances. For example, if the Ombudsman believes that the delay was as a result of exceptional circumstances.   A link to their leaflet is as follows: http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/consumer-leaflet.htm   Or, alternatively, they can be contacted at: The Financial Ombudsman Service Exchange Tower London E14 9SR   They can also be contacted by email at [email protected], by telephone on 0800 023 4567, or by logging on to their website at www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk   As your complaint is in relation to a data concern, you may also wish to contact the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). You can telephone them on 0303 123113 or simply log onto their website at https://ico.org.uk/make-a-complaint/   Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss this matter further with me.
    • March 2020 !   A bit late, forget about it move on....
    • Its a bit messy...there was alot to cover. Anyway, thats all I have.     1620939027446.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 33 replies
    • 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
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

Cash4phones - creditors meeting - 13th Jan Please retweet - https://cag.tw/tf7


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1940 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

From HMRC: A liquidation committee is a small group of representative creditors appointed by all the creditors to assist the liquidator in conducting the liquidation.

 

At all Section 98 meetings the liquidator is obliged to ask whether the creditors wish to form a committee. The chairman will ask whether any creditors wish to put themselves forward as members of the committee and then all creditors present will vote on whether they are prepared to allow that creditor to sit on the committee. Voting is by a simple majority, based on the value of each attending creditor’s debt.

 

If not appointed at the Section 98 meeting, a committee can be formed at a later meeting.

 

The minimum number of creditors needed to form a committee is 3. The maximum number of creditors who can sit on a committee is 5. If there are less than 3 creditors attending the Section 98 meeting in person then a committee cannot be formed at that meeting.

 

So basically there must be at least 3 creditors present and willing to act on a committee before it can be formed. Although proxy votes will be counted as far as passing resolutions are concerned, they don't affect this requirement (or so I read it). So unless at least 2 other creditors turn up that are willing to act on a committee, we will be sunk in that regard.

 

I'll be there. Need 1 more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 174
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

From Apriumben

 

Not so well! They had security on the door, only 4 people turned up, one (turns out he was from the Mirror) was just a proxy, and one was a young girl, and unwilling to take part in a committee - so the requisite minimum of 3 creditors to form the committee was not there

 

 

Looks as if there was a lack of interest from the victims.

 

There is still a chance to form a liquidation committee if people are interested enough.

 

I expect that Apriumben will make a further update later

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't think you should judge peoples lack of interest just because they are not going to the meeting.

 

For many of us the distance to travel will be too far, too costly and not possible due to family or work commitments.

 

You also have to take stock that many of us would not be experienced enough or confident enough to sit on a committee.

 

Instead you would be far better passing judgement on the governing bodies who are there to supposedly protect consumers from becoming victims of such [problem]s.

 

What has the law, trading standards and even the police done about it all ?

 

I am already out of pocket for my phone and taking them to a small claims court,

 

last thing I need to do now is lose a days pay and fork out travelling fees on top and for what ?

 

to enter something that I have no experience or understanding of.

 

There needs to be a change to the law and penalties far higher to put people off running such [problem]s,

 

they have better protection by the authorities then the victims.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right of course - but a very large number of people promised to be there but in the end, only three people did show up.

 

That was a great shame.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Naive perhaps, but to be honest I walked away from it thinking that these guys are simply terrible businessmen

that tried to cover up mistakes with dodgy behaviour - the original intention was not to commit fraud.

 

It all seemed to make sense, although they primarily blamed Phillip Henchoz (probably because he wasn't there to defend himself)

 

rather than categorically saying "sorry guys we screwed up". Bit like David Cameron blaming the labour party for all our current woes.

 

The "translator" (George) was very dynamic, nice suit, spoke perfect English, and earned enough for a decent gym membership given the breadth of his shoulders.

 

He knew the answers to complicated questions without even asking the director he was apparently translating for.

 

The "director" (Nerchos) was old, spent the whole time looking at the floor, dressed head to toe in Primark, and spoke no English i.e. patsy.

 

That being said, he does apparently run a similar business in Cyprus and only got involved in C4P because he thought he could rescue it.

 

We did have the option to vote in a different liquidator but nobody volunteered the name of one. The one we're using seemed honest enough anyway.

 

I didn't like the frisking or atmosphere, and I spent most of the first 15 minutes shaking...but given some of the comments on Facebook I can understand why they needed security.

 

I don't think more bodies would have helped us, unless one of those bodies had a master plan to rescue the situation that we could all vote for.

 

Furthermore, Hither Green is a pain in the arse to get to, it's hardly in the city centre.

 

Not surprised it wasn't well-attended...but yeah 3 people is a pretty poor effort, and will probably result in

 

The Mirror guy's article being shrunk from a full page spread to a tiny comment somewhere.

Edited by jonbancroft1988
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that the security was brought in by Cash4phones - not the liquidators.

I don't believe for a moment that a Cypriot business man doesn't speak some pretty fair English.

Apriumben will give a full update later. However their liabilities of about £360K included a loan of - £264,978 from a company called Accident Enquiries Online Ltd - but that company was not at the meeting and a companies House check doesn't reveal that such a company exists. Furthermore a search of their given post code EC2a 4eb - does not reveal any business of that name at that address.

Their liabilities also include £10K to the Post Office for prepaid envelopes - the Post Office also were not there but £10k of envelopes reveals the scale of the operation. Accumulated liabilities to customers was £72K - meaning £72,000 of unpaid phones!!!

Total assets - 750 phones now valued at £2.00 each - total £1500.

 

So, out of 750 phones, one of them may be yours - meaning anyone who reads this thread. Where are these phones? Who has assessed their value? - Cash4phones, of course. Is there any opportunity to carry out an independent assessment. What's the chances that some company will make a bid of £1500 for those phones and they also will be shipped off abroad.

Oh, by the way - want to know where your phones have gone? They have all been shipped off to India and other countries - and no doubt a good whack to Cyprus where the director is running another very similar business "recycling" mobile phones at the same time.

 

Why the musical chairs of directors, false addresses - and why was the director - apparently - a person who claimed to speak no English so that the meeting had to be conducted by his interpreter and no one there to verify that what was being said between them in Greek was being correctly translated?

 

On the basis of £10,000 envelopes and remaining 750 phones, it is clear that we are dealing with at least 10,000 victims - and probably more.

Also don't forget the many stories we have heard here and elsewhere of offer prices being reduced and when that new value was refused, of the phone being returned mysteriously with screens broken or otherwise unusable - these were phones which the owners said were in pristine condition when they were sent off.

 

By the way, there is also no explanation that the company set up other websites under different names and had mobile phones diverted to them by a postal re-routing service. This at the least is very compelling evidence of rank dishonesty.

 

Back to the loan - why a loan of £264,978? Is this a good way of channelling money around and making sure that eventually it gets lost in the system?

 

 

 

I don't see any straightforward and satisfactory explanations for any of the activities of this company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But what are we supposed to do about it? Apart from this new information about the non-existent loan company, the police already know everything. We can "assist" the IP by letting them know your findings, but I'm sure that they should have figured it all out for themselves already, meaning they're either dodgy or incompetant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I really don't think you should judge peoples lack of interest just because they are not going to the meeting. For many of us the distance to travel will be too far, too costly and not possible due to family or work commitments. You also have to take stock that many of us would not be experienced enough or confident enough to sit on a committee.

 

Completely agree that for many people the distance/timing would be too much, and a whole other bunch of perfectly valid reasons. However bear in mind that this isn't just down to the people posting on here, there are hundreds, probably thousands, of others also affected. The key thing is that if a company / person can rely on this apathy, there is no real reason why they won't be tempted to do this over and over again. Obviously if the sums were higher then people would be more motivated - which just gives a licence to those who want to take advantage to go for quantity over quality of [problem].

 

Anyway, whilst there was little to be gained in the meeting itself it did raise a whole raft of questions, many of which I have now passed on to the liquidator to follow up. I expect a proper investigation to be done, and I expect some sort of proof it is being done. I have no reason at this stage to doubt the integrity of Capital Books however it is the motivation to dig that is my concern. Capital Books have charged a tidy sum for their initial work, however the prospect of them getting any more themselves is dim. If the trail gets too complicated and time consuming it may possibly get given up as a bad job. That is the reason I would have wanted to sit on a committee - not being motivated by money I would perhaps be more inclined to carry on if the going got tough. Having said that, the last thing I need in my life right now is to have to sit on a committee - but if it does turn out to be possible I will still volunteer my services.

 

I cannot promise to update this post with any information I may get, as some things may well be confidential. However I can promise that if I do get any information I can possibly share, I will. Equally if the liquidator is not forthcoming with information I will share that fact also. Thank you to those who sent me your proxy forms, sorry I was not able to use them. I did however peruse the entire file of lodged creditor forms, and at least 50% had nominated the 'Chairman' as their proxy. I'm not an expert but that suggests to me that would allow the Company director to use the votes, or in best case scenario the liquidator. I have no idea why they would have specifically recommended the Chairman but doubt our votes would have meant anything as a result.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems I was conned twice. Touché

I just think you are decent - and that most people are decent - and that makes them all the more easy for the few who are very much less decent. Gangs like this have a very easy time of it. they can use the internet to take advantage of a large number of victims without anyone realise the full scale of the problem. It is the fragmentation of Trading Standards and of the police which means that even they never fully understand how national this kind of setup is and this is why they don't get round to taking any action.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, I have just learned that there was a company called Accident Enquiries Online Ltd registered with Companies House, number 6827946, but it changed its name and is now AOE Trading Ltd. However, the name change was in August 2011,

 

However, looking at Companies House - I see that Philip Henchoz was a director of AOE Trading as well as being a previous director of Cash4phones.

 

Also VASANT KARA was a director of AOE Trading and I have a feeling that eh was a director of C4P as well

 

So what is the truth about this loan????

Link to post
Share on other sites
Accident Enquiries Online Ltd are nowAEO Trading Ltd, EIGHTH FLOOR 6 NEW STREET SQUARE, NEW FETTER LANE, LONDON, ENGLAND, EC4A 3AQ

 

They are on the financial services register.

 

Yes and they are linked to Cash4phones and large sums of money passed between them.

 

I think that liquidator should be informed - as well as the police and Trading Standards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vasant Kara was a director from 30/3/201 to 30/04/2010. The insolvency practitioner has not yet had sufficient time to start investigating this company properly so we can't blame him at this time. However by supplying him such information as comes to light he has a duty to investigate and possibly report on it. When I say 'possibly report' I refer to the fact the some parts of his investigations are kept secret - so a) he shouldn't tell us, and b) we can't tell if he has properly investigated and found such things as Director fraud.

 

However there are limits to what we can do, and as long as we do what we can, ultimately whatever happens is outside of our control.

We do not have enough details at this point to go much further. Information will be passed on. lets not lose any more sleep on this - we have all lost money, put it behind you now if you can and move on poorer but wiser. Please be assured though that anything that does come along will be followed up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Vasant Kara was a director from 30/3/201 to 30/04/2010. The insolvency practitioner has not yet had sufficient time to start investigating this company properly so we can't blame him at this time. However by supplying him such information as comes to light he has a duty to investigate and possibly report on it. When I say 'possibly report' I refer to the fact the some parts of his investigations are kept secret - so a) he shouldn't tell us, and b) we can't tell if he has properly investigated and found such things as Director fraud.

 

 

 

However there are limits to what we can do, and as long as we do what we can, ultimately whatever happens is outside of our control.

 

We do not have enough details at this point to go much further. Information will be passed on. lets not lose any more sleep on this - we have all lost money, put it behind you now if you can and move on poorer but wiser. Please be assured though that anything that does come along will be followed up.

 

 

 

 

Thanks for trying Ben. Gutted that no logical conclusion has been met but what I do know is that these are crooks. Researching the company before, I found that there are many businesses that these crooks are involved in. Namely Vincent Karan and phil henchoz. I called the accidents company up before (they shared a unit at gateway mews) and they denied all knowledge of being involved with cash4phones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all! I have just found this forum, a bit too late, I think.

I also sent them my iphone4 in September last year and still did not get any money. They ignore my emails and do not answer the phone.

Does anyone know what i should do in this new situation? Does it still make sense to chase them by letter or email?

Please, let me know, as I got confused.

Thanks!

Monika

Link to post
Share on other sites

Monika. You are very late, at this stage i doubt whether phoning or emailing would do anything, even legal action cant be recommended at this stage , read the above and you will see that the company had applied to be wound up, eventually there may be some assets but i doubt whether the many people who lost their phones will receive much if anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all! I have just found this forum, a bit too late, I think.

I also sent them my iphone4 in September last year and still did not get any money. They ignore my emails and do not answer the phone.

Does anyone know what i should do in this new situation? Does it still make sense to chase them by letter or email?

Please, let me know, as I got confused.

Thanks!

Monika

You should contact the liquidators and get a debt form. Contact the police and also Trading Standards.

Keep an eye on this forum for developments

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately regardless of what else happens, you will NOT get any money back from C4P. The level of debt is such that no one would get anything regardless of what the liquidator finds.

I have however received this from him:-

 

"As I stated in the meeting of creditors, I have no personal and professional relationship with the Company or its current or previous directors prior to the meeting of directors.

 

I advise you that it is my duty as Liquidator to investigate the actions/conduct of the directors and to make a report to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State will then decide whether they have sufficient evidence to be able to issue proceedings under the Company Directors Disqualification Act.

 

I am in process of inviting all creditors of the company to provide me with any information they have on the conduct of the directors and I would ask you to provide to me any evidence you have on the directors conduct.

 

My report is confidential to ensure that any litigation is not adversely affected should the Secretary of State decide to issue proceedings.

 

Please feel free to contact me with any information or documentation which will assist me in my investigations and any potential recovery action against the directors."

 

If that gives anyone any peace of mind....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately regardless of what else happens, you will NOT get any money back from C4P. The level of debt is such that no one would get anything regardless of what the liquidator finds.

I have however received this from him:-

 

"As I stated in the meeting of creditors, I have no personal and professional relationship with the Company or its current or previous directors prior to the meeting of directors.

 

I advise you that it is my duty as Liquidator to investigate the actions/conduct of the directors and to make a report to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State will then decide whether they have sufficient evidence to be able to issue proceedings under the Company Directors Disqualification Act.

 

I am in process of inviting all creditors of the company to provide me with any information they have on the conduct of the directors and I would ask you to provide to me any evidence you have on the directors conduct.

 

My report is confidential to ensure that any litigation is not adversely affected should the Secretary of State decide to issue proceedings.

 

Please feel free to contact me with any information or documentation which will assist me in my investigations and any potential recovery action against the directors."

 

If that gives anyone any peace of mind....

 

Switching from naive idiot mode to paranoid crazy-person mode, but is there any way to find out if this was the same IP involved in the liquidation of any other companies set up by Henchoz and co.?

 

Apriumben, can you remember the name of the translator alleging to be a non-practicing solicitor? I work for a law firm (far removed from consumer law, so not of much use) so we might be able to dig something up.

 

I wasn't aware that they'd set up other phone recycling websites with UK domains. Does anyone have proof of this or is it a rumour?

Edited by jonbancroft1988
Link to post
Share on other sites

I advise you that it is my duty as Liquidator to investigate the actions/conduct of the directors and to make a report to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State will then decide whether they have sufficient evidence to be able to issue proceedings under the Company Directors Disqualification Act.

 

The Secretary of State in this situation is the Insolvency Service.

 

http://www.bis.gov.uk/insolvency

 

You can also confirm the credential of insolvency practitioners here

 

http://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/fip1/

 

If you have firm evidence of misconduct you can report it here

 

http://www.bis.gov.uk/insolvency/Companies/investigations-hotline

Edited by Master Tyke
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if I am leading you up the garden path

 

but if anyone is a member of the site Linked In, you can search for companies.

 

If you search for Cash4phones it return's a number of people who have worked with or for them

but some to my surprise are actually overseas too.

 

Might be worth trying to contact some of the staff and see if they have info to add...

 

.Never know you might come across just the one who was upset at loosing their job and looking for a bit of revenge.

 

Having read all of the other posts, you don't have to be a genius to work out this was a [problem],

 

the question is how much time and money are the Trading standards/police prepared to spend to prove it.

 

Very frustrating what grates me is the principal of it all rather then the financial loss.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi, a big thank you to those of you who attended the meeting. And thanks to those who run this site for enabling us to vent our views in this horrible situation. :mad2:

 

Thank you. I'm dropping you a note directly as well.

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...