Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Taking O2 and debt collection agencies to court?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3615 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

What they mean is that you wouldnt like to see your brothers in troublwe with the law so they will continue to harass you as that isnt a criminal offence that they will get banged up for, being a corporation. call their bluff and tell them that you are happy for the matter to go to court and you will assist them in any way you can. Now that they accept that it was a fraudulent account (which is why you want everything in writing as they will now backtrack) they can call off their goon squad and close tha ccounts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

What they mean is that you wouldnt like to see your brothers in troublwe with the law so they will continue to harass you as that isnt a criminal offence that they will get banged up for, being a corporation. call their bluff and tell them that you are happy for the matter to go to court and you will assist them in any way you can. Now that they accept that it was a fraudulent account (which is why you want everything in writing as they will now backtrack) they can call off their goon squad and close tha ccounts.

 

Too late for that. I've just submitted a Monelyclaim online for £1000.

 

I wasn't in the country... Whoever opened the accouts has nothing to do with me. They call this a civil matter so I've made it one. The irony is he said that one of the phones had been used to call my own number ... When I said I'm hardly likely to call myself, he said that I might have taken phones out and given them out like Xmas presents.

 

Overall I just feel this is just a company trying to pick on people and get their own way. I'm never going to be the smartest bloke in the world... However they don't realise that I don't back down from fights and I don't let myself be picked on.

 

I've already sent the letter before action to cabot financial... And will be starting proceedings against them when their seven days are up. I'm praying Lowell do issue proceedings next week so I can counter sue.

 

The irony is when you add up the cost of the ombudsman and then instructing a lawyer and coming to my home court, even if they win it will cost them more than if they had just closed the accounts and written it off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Okay - Update coming, and some advice required.

 

All of the defaults have now been removed from my credit file.

 

The DCA's removed them off their own back, after O2 decided to not provide them with any information about the accounts.

 

So on that front I have "won".

 

Both DCA's have given me written assurance that the debt will not be sold,

reassigned or passed back to the original creditor.

In fairness they have been really reasonable about this.

 

However today I received a recorded delivery letter from O2 about my claim.

I had consigned myself to writing off the £60 which I paid and just letting it all go

- so that I can move on with my life.

 

However the tone of it, and the message has caused me enough upset to consider pursuing them for damages.

 

They have ridiculed me.

 

They start of, saying that "embarrassingly" I've called them O2 rather than telfonica

(my mistake, it's not like their shops and website have O2 written at the top).

 

They have gone through again just making fun of me,

ranging from them saying I've not pointed out which section of the DPA

I'm claiming for, and then just calling me a lier.

 

If they had sent me a letter, or called me saying they are sorry I'd have let it go.

 

But now I'm wondering if I should continue my claim for damages.

 

I can prove I didn't open the accounts,

indeed I know that they have not got any evidence I did.

 

I can prove that they have lied.

Ranging from them promising to send me letter,

promising to look into this,

and even them claiming that my bank have told them it's not fraud

(I've only got 2 current accounts, and I've called them both and they both promise

that they would not disclose me information to other companies).

 

So should I let it go,

or waste hours more of my life chasing them through the courts.

 

Ultimately I cannot prove loss - and I know Durkin doesn't bind as it's scottish.

 

Any advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PWo2,

 

Can you hide personal data and post the letter here as a PDF. Then we can see what they've said and give opinion.

 

Although Richard Durkin's case was Scottish, I'm sure the decision would be seen as relevant as regards legal precedent in the UK.

 

:-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd certainly involve the CEO and reference his to the recent successful +£8k claim by Richard durkin and HFC

regarding the registering of false information.

 

Yes, that's what I'd do too.

 

Getting the defaults removed is great.

 

You can use the small claims court to get general damages as per my case. It shouldn't be too stressfull and might net you enough for a few extra accessories for your new home.

 

It seems you've already put a claim in for £1000? I can't see what'll stop them paying up.

 

If not, just ask the small claims court for general damages to be awarded at their discretion as per my case. The wrongful default is a negligent misrepresentation. Don't bother with the DPA. It's been written for lawyers, not consumers.

 

They should settle but if they don't the case has been ratified by the Supreme Court which binds all UK courts. They'll struggle to wriggle out of that.

 

Well done for standing up to the criminals. There are plenty of bad guys here in the UK, you'll have noticed.

 

You should also report them to the police for fraud and extortion. It's about time folk were jailed for all this terrorism!

 

Do what you think is right, I suppose.

 

Good luck whichever way you go. It shouldn't take long to finish now.

 

Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately I cannot prove loss

 

Any advice?

 

Yes, there's been some confusion about this. I couldn't prove loss either (I did actually but it's a long story) and I was still awarded general damages for the negligent misrepresentation.

 

Cheers,

 

Richard

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that's what I'd do too.

 

Getting the defaults removed is great.

 

You can use the small claims court to get general damages as per my case. It shouldn't be too stressfull and might net you enough for a few extra accessories for your new home.

 

It seems you've already put a claim in for £1000? I can't see what'll stop them paying up.

 

If not, just ask the small claims court for general damages to be awarded at their discretion as per my case. The wrongful default is a negligent misrepresentation. Don't bother with the DPA. It's been written for lawyers, not consumers.

 

They should settle but if they don't the case has been ratified by the Supreme Court which binds all UK courts. They'll struggle to wriggle out of that.

 

Well done for standing up to the criminals. There are plenty of bad guys here in the UK, you'll have noticed.

 

You should also report them to the police for fraud and extortion. It's about time folk were jailed for all this terrorism!

 

Do what you think is right, I suppose.

 

Good luck whichever way you go. It shouldn't take long to finish now.

 

Richard.

 

Thanks Richard.

 

I will post up O2's letter, with some info removed. However if anyone from O2 is looking at this they can work out who I am quite easily and I don't really care about that. I'm also a bit worried about peoples reactions - as it's been written in a way that makes me look awful even though I can cut through almost all of it and prove much of it is made up - or clever wording.

 

I've contacted the CEO TWICE now (to those saying to do this). First time, I was promised to be emailed saying they will get back to me. They never did. I called them, and they claimed they had forgotten too... They said they would look into it and get back that day. They did saying they would do nothing, but would write me a letter. The letter never arrived. Emailed CEO again saying I never got my letter - I got a call the next day from an incredibly rude women saying I needed to send all evidence NOW and they she would personally telling a judge how unhelpful I was. Said she would send the previous letter, and a letter saying what she had said again - Guess what NO LETTERS AGAIN.

 

The only letter I got was them calling me the wrong name, and being insulting. I honestly believe they are going out of their way to be dishonest, and trying to screw me over. That might sound heavy - but I honestly cannot believe that they would be so incompetent.

 

BUT - two DCA's wrote these accounts off, with nearly no fight. This was after they looked into it... Does that not seem strange to you? My research into this, says that they are not prone to rolling over like that. I feel that they saw something that they know was wrong. I feel that they know what is happening is wrong.

 

I'm more than happy to keep this going. Basically my case is simpler than yours. I just want a nice life... I've not lost as much as you. However I wouldn't treat anyone like O2 have. I wouldn't act in such a manner. And ultimately if O2 can do this to me (youngish, fairly informed professional with some education) - what chance would an elderly person, or someone with special needs stand? I don't expect to change the world, but I don't mind taking a chunk out of the system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

merged and reduced

 

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

Hi,

 

It seems a fairly standard defence. Nothing too much to worry about. Lawyers are lawyers. They hide behind waffle. Best not to feed them.

 

I can't help you with the DPA. I'd have avoided that. Too complicated.

 

Try altering your claim to general damages for the negligent misrepresentations that were the defaults. No proof required for that. Much easier. You just need to say the credit accounts weren't yours, which you've done.

 

They then need to prove that they are yours, otherwise they are liable. It sounds like they may struggle with that!

 

If you do decide to proceed, don't insist on £1000. Ask the court to determine the level of damages as per my case. (Durkin v HFC) You might be surprised how much you'll get! (Unless they settle).

 

Have fun. Don't let this stress you out. There's a recent Supreme Court ruling backing you all the way.

 

If, at any point, you do feel stressed (that will be their primary tactic now that they've lodged a defence), they'll probably be happy for both sides to walk away as it'll cost them less. Stress definitely isn't worth it but I guess you're already well aware of that.

 

Consider a twitter rant too...

 

Good Luck.

 

Richard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They seem to be alleging that you must have known about the accounts because monthly statements were sent to your address since 2011. Proving that the accounts weren't yours will be key to this.

 

I think you should submit a CPR 31.14 request asking for a copy of the monthly statements mentioned in their Defence - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?159445-Getting-Them-To-Reveal-Their-Vitals.-Using-CPR-31.14-to-Your-Advantage. I bet they can't. They should be put to proof of the claims they are making in the Defence.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They seem to be alleging that you must have known about the accounts because monthly statements were sent to your address since 2011. Proving that the accounts weren't yours will be key to this.

 

I think you should submit a CPR 31.14 request asking for a copy of the monthly statements mentioned in their Defence - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?159445-Getting-Them-To-Reveal-Their-Vitals.-Using-CPR-31.14-to-Your-Advantage. I bet they can't. They should be put to proof of the claims they are making in the Defence.

 

I agree, and all the best Probswith02. These phone companies are causing havoc with peoples' credit files, especially if you are trying to find a mortgage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

It seems a fairly standard defence. Nothing too much to worry about. Lawyers are lawyers. They hide behind waffle. Best not to feed them.

 

I can't help you with the DPA. I'd have avoided that. Too complicated.

 

Try altering your claim to general damages for the negligent misrepresentations that were the defaults. No proof required for that. Much easier. You just need to say the credit accounts weren't yours, which you've done.

 

They then need to prove that they are yours, otherwise they are liable. It sounds like they may struggle with that!

 

If you do decide to proceed, don't insist on £1000. Ask the court to determine the level of damages as per my case. (Durkin v HFC) You might be surprised how much you'll get! (Unless they settle).

 

Have fun. Don't let this stress you out. There's a recent Supreme Court ruling backing you all the way.

 

If, at any point, you do feel stressed (that will be their primary tactic now that they've lodged a defence), they'll probably be happy for both sides to walk away as it'll cost them less. Stress definitely isn't worth it but I guess you're already well aware of that.

 

Consider a twitter rant too...

 

Good Luck.

 

Richard.

 

Do you know how I alter the claim? I agree in hindsight that the DPA is a bit of a mess, and wasn't really designed for this situation.

 

Again - do I have to submit and forms to claim general damages? I specified £1k as at the time I wanted to get the defaults removed without costing me a fortune in fees. I sort of chickened out at the £1k but it seems that if I am going to persue this, I may as well go for it properly.

 

The interesting point about it costing them less... They have already instructed http://exchangechambers.co.uk/barristers/gareth-shires . Since they are paying a barrister to look at this and send letters... Well lets just say it tells me they are in some way worried. Surely they employ in house lawyers to deal with this stuff, atleast before it gets to court. It seems mad that if they are instructing barristers, they don't just settle. Guess they want to fight this one out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They seem to be alleging that you must have known about the accounts because monthly statements were sent to your address since 2011. Proving that the accounts weren't yours will be key to this.

 

I think you should submit a CPR 31.14 request asking for a copy of the monthly statements mentioned in their Defence - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?159445-Getting-Them-To-Reveal-Their-Vitals.-Using-CPR-31.14-to-Your-Advantage. I bet they can't. They should be put to proof of the claims they are making in the Defence.

 

They are actually alleging statements were sent UNTIL 2011. Basically I didn't live at the address in question. I can prove that using all sorts of information, including the electoral roll! I have a recording from them saying "it looks like someone you may know opened the accounts, this isn't the type of fraud we are interested in". I'm not really sure what there argument is... They certainly are not acknowledging there failure to do anything once I did let them know...

 

There are a few points which I cant prove are wrong in their statement. They claim they emailed me... Complete lie. My email account keeps all emails... And I've searched and there is not one! Infact at the time I primarily used a work email account - my belief is that they are just making stuff up.

 

If I were to do a SAR asking for everything, it might be easier. However so far they have not sent stuff they have promised... And have clearly made stuff up. So I believe that they will just remove anything that doesn't help them. And will even add stuff... I honestly believe that they are acting in a criminal way. This isn't a company making a mistake and following their rules - they are lying and being actively dishonest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, and all the best Probswith02. These phone companies are causing havoc with peoples' credit files, especially if you are trying to find a mortgage.

 

I have no objection to them properly issuing defaults. I do have a problem with them giving them to people who have clearly said it's not right. The OFT guidelines say if in doubt let the county court test the evidence before ruining peoples lives. Let's just say - when one of the DCA's tried they ran off quickly when I presented information. I think O2 know this is dodgy - and for some reason they are not willing to sort it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is something amiss here, I cannot see why they are pursuing this.

 

They admitted to you that it was a fraudulent account. I cannot help it But I feel there has been something happening behind the scenes that they seem very interested in keep covered up.

 

Im beginning to wonder if their team at store level and above has acted inappropriately and they do not want it to come come out as it might cause the brand extreme damage. There MUST be something other than your £1000 at stake for them.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is something amiss here, I cannot see why they are pursuing this.

 

They admitted to you that it was a fraudulent account. I cannot help it But I feel there has been something happening behind the scenes that they seem very interested in keep covered up.

 

Im beginning to wonder if their team at store level and above has acted inappropriately and they do not want it to come come out as it might cause the brand extreme damage. There MUST be something other than your £1000 at stake for them.

 

As I've said something is up - they won't send any letters stating their position (that was the first one I've had). They say they will send something and then don't... Okay - letters can go amiss but multiple copies? They refuse to put stuff in writing (recorded) and then say they will and refuse. They don't want to sort this out.

 

They told me in 2013 they are still looking into it... I have the screen shot proving that... Asked on their online facility. They just said "you shouldn't have been told that". Wouldn't say anything more. Either someone was completely making it up - OR they were looking into something, and they didn't want me to know that.

 

The DCA's dropped out very very quickly. As in they sent for information to O2 and then both dropped out as soon as they had a response. Now they won't tell me what O2 said.. Apart from O2 claiming "they don't have records due to age". They have something because they have stated it in that letter. Infact they did say that O2 were "going around in circles".

 

They have gone straight to a barrister. No in house solicitor dealing with it.

 

I truly and honestly believe that something is a miss. I don't know what is it... But I do know that not only did I not take those phones out, but that I couldn't have taken two of them. One of them I was living 200 miles from the address they were registered too - the other two I was in a different country with no access to the internet or phones for most of the time.

 

I'm just thinking for the sake of £1k - would you not just apologise and offer £500 or even less to make it go away? They no longer have a financial stake in this matter, they sold the accounts. This is only going to cost them money - unless they get awarded costs...

 

Overall - I'm just confused. I never originally asked for money. I just asked for them to sort it. They refused at all points. They wouldn't even look at it... They told me they were not interested in this. They refused to put things into writing. They then said they would once i wrote to the CEO but never did.

 

My attitude now is simple. I'll run this to court. I'm going to put in a SAR - and I'm going to see if I can change the situation as Richard above has said. It's not about the money - it's about the principle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question. Before these disputed contracts did You have any other contracts with o2 or subsiduries?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

 

The SabreSheep, All information is offered on good faith and based on mine and others experiences. I am not a qualified legal professional and you should always seek legal advice if you are unsure of your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Were payments drawn down from your banking account as stated?

 

Not that I am aware off. I'd say 90% chance no. Basically - I had a couple of credit cards and isa's etc... I'm not sure if it's possible to take payment from those sort of accounts. But certainly not out of my current account. I'd have noticed that.

 

I've asked what banks the money came out - and they won't tell me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question. Before these disputed contracts did You have any other contracts with o2 or subsiduries?

 

No. I've only ever had an account with vodafone.

 

However I do know that they are lying. Basically they said on the phone that one of the phones was brought from carphone warehouse... For 3 months I worked for carphone warehouse when I left the forces and needed a job badly. We used a system call pie. Obviously I looked myself up (before I knew this might I add). Basically the system saves literally everything. So I know that there is no way that the phone was taken out via carphone warehouse. I even asked for the storecode - as I still know people who work for them. Guess what - they wouldn't tell me. The only thing under my "lead" was a charger I had brought and stuff like that. There were no phones brought from the carphone warehouse under my name... Literally could not and did not happen. It's not even possible to remove the information - even if a phone is removed. Once it goes into pie it is there forever.

 

I also know about how contracts are set up because of that job. This is probably more about your previous question - but lets just say that it's more than possible to link an account to another persons bank, the bank for direct debit account isn't even checked when a phone is taken out. Infact there are ways around the credit checks... You should need a debit/credit card for identification. However again there is a long winded way around that. Put it this way - if you wanted to open a phone account in someone elses name it wouldn't be hard to do. Infact once it happened at my store by accident... Someone opened a phone account in their dads name, as the D.O.B was not checked... All of the internal safety checks failed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest you also issue a CPR 31.14 request as per the template linked for any documents mentioned in the Defence (i.e. the email they mention and the statements), mentioning in your letter that you have never seen any of those documents.

 

CPR 31.14 is a useful tactical device, as if they do not produce the documents it will damage their credibility in court. Unlike a SAR it will be dealt with by a litigation team and the time for compliance is shorter than the time for compliance with a SAR (7 days vs. 40 days).

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are right I am afraid in that there is no prospect f you being able to claim general damages in this(unless they settle) there is no precedent far any such award, with due respect to Richard his claim was in a Scottish court and it was not an award of the court anyway, it was an uncontested claim, the decision has been mentioned in several lower court claims on this forum alone and in each case discounted as being irrelevant(again with all due respect).

 

You need to quantify actual damages, or at least state how damages would have been incurred, perhaps you had a clear record other than these entrees or some other factor.

 

See Haliday and Smeaton Vs equafax for more relevant case law.

 

The DPA does not allow any claim for general damages.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...