Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • so all speculative invoices since that date should be refunded....ruddy fleecers!   dx  
    • Well if you have got crime reference number that's a good start. You should be recording your calls and you should not rely on calls which are apparently recorded by others – especially not the police who will always be very reluctant to disclose any information even under a statutory request. When you are on the phone to anybody you should make sure that if there is something you are not clear about you should ask them to repeat it so that you can make notes. Read our customer services guide. The police are correct – as I have already pointed out – the car belongs to you and so if it is sold to somebody else then it is stolen. If it is not given to you then it is stolen. You should always in all your dealings with anybody refer to the fact that your car has been stolen.
    • Incidentally, a brief word – for you, but also for anyone else who visits this thread. It's a word about insurance. By requiring you to take out insurance, they are effectively asking you to protect yourself against their own negligence, their own breach of contract or the criminality of their own employees if stuff get stolen. This is extraordinary and it is part of the culture of the removal business and I have no idea how this culture came about and it is now accepted so meekly as the natural way of things by people who use removal services. There is exactly the same culture in courier services so that companies such as DPD, DHL, UPS – and particularly Hermes require their customers to pay for additional protection in case the service that they have already contracted for and paid for is not carried out. Amazing! It doesn't stop there. Extended warranties. If you go into any Currys PC World, if you buy any computer or washing machine or fridge from them or anywhere else, some salesman will chase after you and ask you if you want to buy an extended warranty. So for extra money you can buy an insurance which will apparently cover you in case the item you have bought breaks down within a certain amount of time – normally three years or five years. Incredible! You already have perfectly good statutory rights which will cover you for most of those situations over the foreseeable reasonably expected life of the item you buy. What they are all doing – whether they are removals, couriers, sellers of white goods and electronic goods, is effectively getting you to pay for rights which you already have under statute or under ordinary contract law.  
    • Thanks. How much did you pay for the insurance? AnyVan is declining responsibility because they say that the items did not go missing "in transit". They are wrong. Clearly the removal company took charge of the items and disassembled them. This must be the case because you have received part of the item and it is only part of the item which is missing and that means that they were already under the control of the removal company. In my view that puts the items squarely "in transit". I am quite certain that no judge would simply say that "in transit" refers only to the time that your items are in a removal van. This is far too limited. And in fact I notice that in the summary of terms which you have linked us to:     Clearly insurance cover applies from the moment that the collection begins right until the delivery is finished. However, even if they accepted this point, there are still other ways that they can say that the insurance does not apply to you Looking at the policy which you have linked us to, I see that first of all there is in excess of £50 and that means you have to pay the first £50 of any claim. According to you, you have only lost about £35. Are you saying that the entire book case is worth £20? It seems very little to me. The second thing is that they say that lost items are not insured unless they are listed with their value. Presumably that hasn't happened in your case. On that basis, it seems to me that the insurance doesn't cover you anyway. I do agree that I think you've been treated disgracefully and I don't think that the lack of insurance is any bar to making a claim. If you would like a bit of fun, then we can help you make a small claim in the County Court to recover all of your losses directly from them for their breach of contract/negligence. Of course they won't be used to that kind of treatment – but do you really care? The chances of succeeding if you are prepared to go to the Small Claims Court are better than 90%, in my view. You would have to play a claim fee that you would recover that when you won your case. Of course in the event that you lost, then you would lose that claim fee and also a hearing fee if it got that far. Frankly, for this kind of money I would imagine that they would put their hands up once you issue the papers and they realise that you are serious and it was going to cost them much more money to defend it then simply to pay you out. In addition to getting your money back and delivering a slap, you would acquire transferable skills so that you could confidently in the future sue anyone who got in your way. What's not to like?
    • Guest
      You think I haven't emailed their CEO do you the first thing I did after putting my complaint in not for the first time either he totally ignorant he replied to my first email on the first case but had his assistant handle it not him   this company is the worst ever and they talked me into getting these very unsmart meters that are supposed to save me money yet because I m on PYG smart meters I pay more money than those who get monthly or quarterly bills yet I have already paid for my energy   yet there are hardly any other companies who will take on these meters and wont save me money at all for those who would give me an account but only online which is no good what so ever my problem with EON is their website they keep shutting down on weekends and their app only works when it wants to making it even harder to top up my meters   this has been going on since 2019 when I won my first case and still going on now and they wont help me with it yet they had the cheek to phone me yesterday but the idiot wouldn't listen to what I had to say so I hung up and wouldn't answer him calling back   besides he broke the law be phoning me as I have only allowed them to contact me through email and letter only and now they are saying I never replied to them with-in the 21 days which he is lying.  
  • 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
      • 32 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

Rossendales DCA Threat Letter on Legal aid 'debt'- SCOTLAND


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1526 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

PDF please

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

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/540740/criminal-legal-aid-manual.pdf

 

 

page 13 here makes interesting reading ..not.

 

 

its rather misleading that they don't clearly state

and neither do the rossers [ I wonder why!!]

that this is a debt collection agency

and NOT their bailiffs wing

 

 

powerless to do anything

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
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/540740/criminal-legal-aid-manual.pdf

 

 

page 13 here makes interesting reading ..not.

 

 

its rather misleading that they don't clearly state

and neither do the rossers [ I wonder why!!]

that this is a debt collection agency

and NOT their bailiffs wing

 

 

powerless to do anything

 

Why do you want it in PDF?

 

So I just ignore then?

 

I thought as much but wondered why they suddenly wrote a letter after so many ignored phone calls over the last couple of years. If they do decide to take action through the Scottish sheriff court will I be informed beforehand?

Link to post
Share on other sites

they cant

they are a DCA

only the OWNER of a debt can do court remember

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
  • 3 months later...

I still get about 2-3 calls a week but my phone automatically rejects them and they leave a message on my voice mail which I just delete. I wonder if there is a human being calling me or an auto dialler?

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

I have lived in Scotland since 2008.

 

 

In 2013 I received legal aid for a court case in Manchester which I lost.

 

 

A few days after the case I received a threatening letter from Rossendales debt collectors based in England demanding payment of £500.

 

 

The threatening manner of the letter was unnecessary and I called them to ask who they were as I thought I would pay the legal aid agency.

 

 

Their attitude upset me so I took advice and during this I learned from this site that I shouldn't pay any money to Rossendales I should in fact ask the LA agency to take the debt back and pay them directly.

 

I contacted the LA but they refused to take the debt back.

At this juncture I should mention there was some confusion as the LA agency had cocked up with mistaken identities and sent me someone else's debt for 9K.

 

 

I was confused as Rossendales asked me for £500 while the LA agency asked me for 9K. It took quite a while to sort out as the LA agency I found out really are quite incompetent.

 

I received numerous calls a week from Rossendales.

When I answered there was no one on the other side of the line so I hung up.

This went on for a few weeks until I blocked them as they were calling me while I was at work and meetings.

 

 

To this day I still receive automated responses on my voicemail which I ignore.

 

I have no problem paying but I won't pay Rossendales and the LA agency won't take the debt back so I'm in a quandary.

 

I've been informed as it's a government debt it won't be time barred so this could go on forever or if they decide to take court action.

 

Recently I've been watching 'The Sheriffs are coming' on YouTube.

I know this is based in England and English law but it's made me wonder what action they could take up here.

I'd hate for them to take the Scottish equivalent of a high court writ and come knocking on my door unexpectedly and seize goods.

 

Is this possible in Scotland?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always understood the LA always placed it as a legal charge if you own your own property

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 The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

panicking about nothing again Argyll..

 

threads merged,

 

if you pay attention properly to the cases on ch.5.

you'll see they are all business debts

 

theres nowt anything any trumped up HCEO can do on a govt debt.

 

ignore

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

what acronyms

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
I always understood the LA always placed it as a legal charge if you own your own property

 

I don't understand what you mean. What are the implications?

 

A legal Charge /Restriction on your property to secure the debt.....the Land Registry?

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 The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

No they didn't do that. They tried with the 9K debt that wasn't mine but I disputed it. I never signed into that agreement.

 

I thought I would post on here to get someone's opinion from Scotland.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes I did think that after seeing you'd viewed it on youtude

 

 

DCBL are High Court Enforcement Officers

gov't don't use them..

they don't need too.

 

 

which is why its strange they haven't taken the option available to them

as andy points too if they were that confident they are correct in you owing this money.

 

 

as you've already done by cleverly questioning them

you've seen that they made a mistake before

whats to say this is not another one.....urm...

 

 

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...