Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Dear New Tenant   L C S !st Floor West Wing Town Center House The MerrionCentre Woodhouse Lane Leeds LS2 8LY   02/03/2021   Our Case Ref xxxx Re Our Client E.On   Outstanding balance: £37.xx   FINAL NOTICE   We have been instructed to act on behalf of the above named client to recover the sum of the outstanding of £37.xx for dual fuel consumed at X Whatever Road, Sometown , Anyplace. Despite our previous communications and offer of help we have not received payment or valid reason for non payment for the outstanding balance.   Until you have cleared the outstanding balance, your details may continue to be shared with a credit reference agency.  Other lenders may see information about the way you pay our client and the amount you owe them which could affect your ability to obtain future credit.   In order to prevent any further action and potential inconvenience, we would urge you to pay the full sum immediately or alternatively contact our office on 03445439130 quoting Ref xxxx to discuss your options. Alternatively please email us at [email protected] quoting your reference.   Yours sincerely   Rebecca Carter For and on behalf of LCS   I suspect this is the kind of letter they send when they know they are stuffed?    
    • I’ve been getting debit collection letters from a number of diffrent companies but I don’t recognise any of them. So I signed up to one of the credit rating agencies to find out who I owed money to. But that didn’t help. It just lists the debit collection company and the amounts they say I owe them. The amounts are staggering. now I was caught out once before by a debit collection agency saying I owed money but not who to and I just paid it. It wasn’t till after this that I found out that some agencies just send letters demanding payment for a nonexistent debit. On my credit report it says I owe money to the debit collection agent but there are no records of any original debit. no unpaid loans or credit cards.  so what do I do? I had a serious brain injury so I have memory problems and some untreatable mental illness. Thanks for taking the time to read this.
    • Hi, I’m sorry I haven’t replied sooner and that I wasn’t clearer. The situation is this.  I had a pay as you go sim and wanted to change to a VOXI pay monthly account. the guy on the phone said I’d need a new sim that would be a standard pay monthly sim. He told me that once I got the sim then I could call and have it put on a VOXI account. So. I agreed but at some point in the,long conversation after he ordered the new sim he said that infact I didn’t need a new sim and could just change my pay as you go sim into a VOXI sim. so he did that. I assumed that that was the end of the matter. I had done what I set out to do. And didn’t think about the ‘new’ sim because it was not needed. I assumed he had canceled it because it was not needed. then in January I get a letter saying I was behind on my phone bill. so I called them and that’s when I found out the ‘new’ sim had been ordered but never arrived .
    • Demand for uniforms, computers and household accessories rose after plans to ease lockdown were published. View the full article
    • Hi    Thank you for answering my questions.   As you have not contacted Goskippy about AX stating they were acting on there behalf you need to contact Goskippy urgently and ask them to verify that AX are acting on there behalf. (you need to know if what AX stated is correct)
  • 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
      • 27 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

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 824 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

That is interesting, the FOS seemed to think that it was being sorted out soon.

I found my own original statements and when l opened the account there was no PPI it was added later on without my authorisation, l would not have asked for it.

Cups

 

Same here cups, found original statements from day one and looks as if insurance was added after a couple of months.

 

Had another up-date from FOS yesterday advising that they were still collating information in order to make a final decision ?????

 

Who know's but will keep you posted.

 

:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 112
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I had an old account with Next in which went into arrears in 2005 and debt was passed to a debt recovery company.

 

I wasn't in the position to pay the full balance outstanding and also couldn't agree a repayment plan. Then they offered me a 50% full & final settlement offer, so my parents lent me the money and I paid the requested amount.

 

I received confirmation in writing that their client (Next) had accepted the offer and the balance was nil.

 

Anyway further to a PPI complaint with Next / Underwriters and submission of SAR details, I noticed on the statement of account provided that there was still an outstanding debt amount for the other 50% ?

 

So I contacted Next asking why this was so and they basically replied that it was a partial settlement and the balance was left in case I decided to pay the remaining amount at any future time ???

 

SAR failed to provide any debt letter / correspondences but I still had information.

 

My question is do I just leave it, as last payment was September, 2005 or do I tell them to amend their records accordingly ?

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Same here cups, found original statements from day one and looks as if insurance was added after a couple of months.

 

Had another up-date from FOS yesterday advising that they were still collating information in order to make a final decision ?????

 

Who know's but will keep you posted.

 

:wink:

 

Just an up-date regarding my complaint that is currently with FOS.

 

Well in the meantime I have been trying myself to establish a link between Underwriters and Next and received a further response today from them with the attached original Phoenix Assurance PPP details indicating that PPI was automatically added for a peace of mind etc.

 

So I forwarded details to the FOS adjudicator mentioning that I was trying to address the agency relationship between the two parties and received the following interesting reply.

 

"Thank you for your email – it has been added to your case file.

 

There may have been a financial relationship between Next Directory and the underwriters. But a financial relationship alone is not enough for us to conclude to that the underwriter should be responsible for the actions of the seller. We would need to establish an agency relationship i.e. where Next are carrying out the sale of PPI on behalf of the underwriter.

 

There is currently an example case with the ombudsman, where we are investigating if the insurer can be held responsible for a sales by Next Directory. As it stands, that example case is still on-going. We have made some progress, as the ombudsman issued a provisional decision on our authority to consider cases such as yours. However, the insurer disagreed and made some further submissions, which are now being assessed by our service. Once this example case is resolved, we should be in a better position to advise you if we have the authority to consider your complaint.

 

We will keep you updated on any further developments."

 

I am a bit confused re their comment in establishing that Next carried out the sale of PPI on behalf of Underwriters. Surely this has been proven by Next admitting they sold the PPI issued by Insurers ? Or am I missing something ?

 

Would be happy for any assistance in responding to FOS and if anyone else has a similar situation.

 

Cheers

 

Baz

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just an up-date regarding my complaint that is currently with FOS.

 

Well in the meantime I have been trying myself to establish a link between Underwriters and Next and received a further response today from them with the attached original Phoenix Assurance PPP details indicating that PPI was automatically added for a peace of mind etc.

 

So I forwarded details to the FOS adjudicator mentioning that I was trying to address the agency relationship between the two parties and received the following interesting reply.

 

"Thank you for your email – it has been added to your case file.

 

There may have been a financial relationship between Next Directory and the underwriters. But a financial relationship alone is not enough for us to conclude to that the underwriter should be responsible for the actions of the seller. We would need to establish an agency relationship i.e. where Next are carrying out the sale of PPI on behalf of the underwriter.

 

There is currently an example case with the ombudsman, where we are investigating if the insurer can be held responsible for a sales by Next Directory. As it stands, that example case is still on-going. We have made some progress, as the ombudsman issued a provisional decision on our authority to consider cases such as yours. However, the insurer disagreed and made some further submissions, which are now being assessed by our service. Once this example case is resolved, we should be in a better position to advise you if we have the authority to consider your complaint.

 

We will keep you updated on any further developments."

 

I am a bit confused re their comment in establishing that Next carried out the sale of PPI on behalf of Underwriters. Surely this has been proven by Next admitting they sold the PPI issued by Insurers ? Or am I missing something ?

 

Would be happy for any assistance in responding to FOS and if anyone else has a similar situation.

 

Cheers

 

Baz

 

Any thoughts anyone thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just an up-date regarding my complaint that is currently with FOS.

 

Well in the meantime I have been trying myself to establish a link between Underwriters and Next and received a further response today from them with the attached original Phoenix Assurance PPP details indicating that PPI was automatically added for a peace of mind etc.

 

So I forwarded details to the FOS adjudicator mentioning that I was trying to address the agency relationship between the two parties and received the following interesting reply.

 

"Thank you for your email – it has been added to your case file.

 

There may have been a financial relationship between Next Directory and the underwriters. But a financial relationship alone is not enough for us to conclude to that the underwriter should be responsible for the actions of the seller. We would need to establish an agency relationship i.e. where Next are carrying out the sale of PPI on behalf of the underwriter.

 

There is currently an example case with the ombudsman, where we are investigating if the insurer can be held responsible for a sales by Next Directory. As it stands, that example case is still on-going. We have made some progress, as the ombudsman issued a provisional decision on our authority to consider cases such as yours. However, the insurer disagreed and made some further submissions, which are now being assessed by our service. Once this example case is resolved, we should be in a better position to advise you if we have the authority to consider your complaint.

 

We will keep you updated on any further developments."

 

I am a bit confused re their comment in establishing that Next carried out the sale of PPI on behalf of Underwriters. Surely this has been proven by Next admitting they sold the PPI issued by Insurers ? Or am I missing something ?

 

Would be happy for any assistance in responding to FOS and if anyone else has a similar situation.

 

Cheers

 

Baz

 

Correct me if I am wrong regarding FOS comments re financial relationship between Next and Underwriters - If the policy existed as it does, surely Underwriters would be responsible for the actions of the seller as they par-took in the underwriting of the policy ?

 

Next collected the premiums from customers and then passed on payment less their commission to Underwriters. I also have confirmation in writing that there was remuneration between the policy administrator and Underwriters.

 

Any comments would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Hi Baz,

I have now found some statements that show when l opened my account that there was no ppi, they just added it to the account without telling me or asking me.

When l spoke to the FOS a while ago l thought it was coming to a close, but it still going on.

Cups

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Baz,

I have now found some statements that show when l opened my account that there was no ppi, they just added it to the account without telling me or asking me.

When l spoke to the FOS a while ago l thought it was coming to a close, but it still going on.

Cups

 

Hi cups

 

Yes exactly the same as my case, no PPI when account opened then automatically added later. I have now located some of my first statements in which confirm this.

 

I am still awaiting further from FOS, who last time of asking were still investigating as they had similar cases that were being looked at in order that they could make a final decision. This has been some months now and I will be chasing again this week. Why they cannot make their minds up is beyond me, the policy was missold end of and surely insurers were responsible for selling the policy.

 

I found my adjudicator quite rude when I questioned their predicament, as I felt that I had provided enough evidence to substantiate my claim and yet insurers have still failed to respond accordingly.

 

I believe I have been patient enough with this case but I do not want to upset them too much as I feel I still may have a chance with this one.

 

I will keep you posted and please do the same.

 

Cheers

 

Baz

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Sorry to raise this old post again but didn't want to start a new thread.

 

Things are starting to progress with my complaint with the Financial Ombudsman and I am just doing a bit of housekeeping.

 

On reviewing my SAR details under Next History of Account it states the following:

 

140214 "Called LDS today they advised that Full and Final payment taken on 10.10.05"

 

Now I have confirmation of this in writing from the DCA but as mentioned in my first post I questioned this with Next early last year. They have responded that the bad debt amount still shows on the account ledger in case I decide to pay at a later date.

 

My questions are,

 

1) Can Next still recover the debt now or at a later date ?

 

2) If any reimbursement is forthcoming from another party can they still offset the amount ?

 

3) Should I still be sending something to Next disputing the balance being stated ?

 

Thanks for looking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Baz

Any news on the Next front at your end. I have not heard from the FOS for several months.

Seems like they were meant to be deciding this matter last year but nothing has happened.

Cups

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Baz

Any news on the Next front at your end. I have not heard from the FOS for several months.

Seems like they were meant to be deciding this matter last year but nothing has happened.

Cups

 

Hi Cups,

 

Well I chased FOS adjudicator a couple of weeks ago who advised that they were awaiting further outcome of a particular court case that was in relation to my situation.

 

Last week I received a letter from FOS now confirming that underwriters have agreed that they were also responsible for the mis-sale of insurance but now they are considering how to proceed with reimbursement.

 

I know it sounds positive but I am not counting my chickens until some sort of offer is received.

 

It will probably take another few years to negotiate :-o

 

If I was you and if your complaint is with FOS, I would just send them a brief e-mail requesting an up-date with your complaint.

 

Good Luck and I will keep you posted of any further developments.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Hi Baz, Got a claim form in the post yesterday from The Phoenix Group, basically asking me to give them the details of the claim. They were passed my details by the FOS. Seems like they are the ones who have been told to pay up if there is a liabilty. I would think they are doing it bit by bit. Cups

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Baz, Got a claim form in the post yesterday from The Phoenix Group, basically asking me to give them the details of the claim. They were passed my details by the FOS. Seems like they are the ones who have been told to pay up if there is a liabilty. I would think they are doing it bit by bit. Cups

 

Cheers cups for the heads up.

 

I will get onto FOS and I will keep you posted.

 

:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I received an up-date from FOS.

 

They apologise for the delay but confirm again that PA (GI) / Phoenix have taken the responsibility for the sale of PPI. They also state that they are currently looking at how the policies were sold and maybe a while longer to conclude my complaint ?

 

Did FOS tell you cups that uwrs were sending you a claim form ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, they said that they had reached a decision on who was responsible, but may take a while for them to get to everyone ,

Maybe l was just ahead of you in dates etc,

Cups

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, they said that they had reached a decision on who was responsible, but may take a while for them to get to everyone ,

Maybe l was just ahead of you in dates etc,

Cups

 

OK cups and thanks.

 

I will keep you posted.

 

:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Cups,

 

I today received an e-mail from another different FOS adjudicator advising me again as what was said before regarding Underwriters admitting responsibility.

 

I still have not received any sort of claim form from PA (GI) Ltd and FOS have said that they would contact me once they have decided how to handle this type of complaint ? They have also confirmed that this may take sometime and will up-date me within the next 6 months :shock:

 

Have you had anything further ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Baz

Sent off the form just over two weeks ago but not heard anything back yet???

They said they had got my details from FOS and it was about the Next PPI.

Maybe they are doing it in waves?

Cups

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Baz

Sent off the form just over two weeks ago but not heard anything back yet???

They said they had got my details from FOS and it was about the Next PPI.

Maybe they are doing it in waves?

Cups

 

Thanks cups.

 

Was there any mention on how they are going to calculate redress ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, I'm new to posting but have been for a considerable time following this matter and have to hand it to the originator for persistence.

 

I tried for months writing to Next attempting to get back PPI without success.

 

Finally wrote to ombudsman hoping to glean from them who the underwriters or group was responsible.

 

They were about as useful as a ashtray on a motorbike obviously never read my letter thoroughly and asked me to supply that info!!!

 

Eventually with no other road to go down and unlike cups was forced to give up.

 

My position was quite clear and unambiguous had received no notification of insurance and being part time only, 12 hrs per week and my husband self-employed would have been excluded in any subsequent claim which Next did not dispute.

 

Given the previous posts with the info available can some one please advise if I should press in the same manner as Next a claim with Phoenix As assuming they have allegedly admitted responsibility.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

it might be worthy to start a new thread

of your own

 

 

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...