Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • One of the things that we will need to discover through a statutory subject access request is how they verified the identity of this mystery person. Presumably that person couldn't actually give any ID so does that mean that the inspectors simply took her word for it? It will be useful to know the answers to these questions because all of these companies have duties to process your personal data accurately. If they failed to do that then they could be liable to you for the distress caused as well as any other damage. I'm just trying to envisage a scenario where a ticket inspector stops a young woman who then says that she's been travelling without a ticket. The inspector asks her her name and address and she gives the false name and address. The inspector then asks her to verify this by identification. The woman then says that she is not carrying anything with her. What happens at that point? How does it work? Does the inspector then have to take your word for it and warn her that she will be contacted with a possible sanction? If that's as far as it goes, then it seems a bit ridiculous to me that you stop somebody for travelling without a ticket – evident dishonesty. Then they give the controller their name and address which can't be verified and so the controller has to accept that and on that basis a procedure is started against the named person on the basis that the contact details which were given at the time must be true – even though that person has already demonstrated their dishonesty by travelling without a ticket. Or, are we going to find – if there is a statutory disclosure, that this person is travelling around with some documentation which identifies her as you, your husband or one of your two daughters? Which of course would be very much more serious. This is why we want a list of the rail companies – as much information as possible so that we can start forcing them to disclose information about how this all occurred. I will also be interested in sending an SAR to action fraud to see what they have done with your allegation which you made some time ago and about which you never heard anything further.
    • Evening all,   Right, just spoke to my SIL at length.....................   In response to Andy's question regarding T's & C's, that answer remains the same. The staff MORE cards and general public's cards both had the same T's & C's.   As for when he started the unofficial swiping practice, his best guesstimate is around September 2015.   Another development during our conversation, I asked him if he ever asked customers for their permission to swipe his card to claim their unclaimed points. He said he never actually asked but some regulars would forget their cards sometimes and tell him to take the points. Also, Stonegate would sometimes have promotions like half price food and drinks etc. However to claim the offer you had to have a MORE card. Again, if regulars had forgotten their MORE card he would use his for them to get the offers. I know this doesn't help his cause but in case its relevant I thought I'd offer it up.   I have impressed upon him the urgency of this now so if any more info is required just ask and I will get it.   Cheers
    • The company is called Robinson Way, it was a Barclaycard credit card.   I  moved about 12 months after Barclaycard stopped replying to my letters (re the charges, 2013) - so I did not tell them about my moving, but at the time of the original debt I was living back with my folks; so this most recent letter was sent to there, and my folks forwarded it to me - and likewise, if they had sent me anything in the interim it would have been forwarded to me.
    • I do agree with you.How sad I am right now . I wish I could go back. Mg7  
    • No way I will be doing this again. The way I’m feeling now. stealing doesn’t pay what I’m going through right now , it’s really hard. I wish I could have learned the first time. thank you for your help.   mg7  
  • Our picks

Workman never supplied carpets after deposit paid for carpets


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2382 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

A flooring contractor undertook some work fitting a wooden floor for us, and agreed to supply carpets. We paid in full for the floor which he fitted as agreed. And a deposit for the carpets of a thousand pounds. To cut a really long story short he never supplied any carpets and the floor lasted a month before buckling and peeling away. As a result we are taking him to the small claims court to recover the money, but are now concerned that because we are suing the individual rather than the company he owns - he may wriggle out of it. His defence is merely that he never received any money from us or entered into any contract! (Even though we paid to the company account via bank transfer. We are feeling pretty desperate so any help greatly appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Naomi

 

Welcome to CAG

 

The guys will advise as soon as they are available.

I've added a title for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello there,

 

Do you have anything in writing from them at all?

 

We never received a written acknowledgement of the works in terms of a formal contract, but there is plenty of e-mail and text correspondence that refers to the works to be carried out. E-mails discussing dates, e-mails where he requests funds are paid, as well as an e-mail saying that he cannot fit carpets before Christmas because they aren't in stock. We also have a letter he has written when he says that he isn't going to rectify the problem because he doesn't think it's his fault, and declaring that he does intend to return part of our carpet deposit when he sees fit. It's now completely extraordinary that he is saying he never received anything - when we have a bank statement to prove it, but I fear he is so dishonest, that any way of getting out of it he will. Especially if somehow we should have put the name of the company rather than the contractor on the claim. Any thoughts very gratefully appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A person can't be dissolved to avoid any outcome as a company can. Should you win, and it seems as if you have enough evidence, and he refuses to pay, you can get bailiffs involved to visit his home and take possessions or his car.

If the amount owed is £750 or more, you can file to make him bankrupt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n001a-eng.pdf

 

'but I fear he is so dishonest, that any way of getting out of it he will. Especially if somehow we should have put the name of the company rather than the contractor on the claim. Any thoughts very gratefully appreciated.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you paid the company bank account, that would be a reason for him to say you should have sued the company and not him personally. But it is really up to him to raise it as an issue. If he wanted to use this argument he should have said so in his Defence. If he tries to make this point in court, you can explain your side of the story why you think you contracted with the individual and not with a limited company.

 

Personally I'd let the small claims process continue. Usually you are much better off having a CCJ against an individual rather than against a company.

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
As you paid the company bank account, that would be a reason for him to say you should have sued the company and not him personally. But it is really up to him to raise it as an issue. If he wanted to use this argument he should have said so in his Defence. If he tries to make this point in court, you can explain your side of the story why you think you contracted with the individual and not with a limited company.

 

Personally I'd let the small claims process continue. Usually you are much better off having a CCJ against an individual rather than against a company.

 

Thank you very much. We will proceed in that case. I really appreciate your advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
As you paid the company bank account, that would be a reason for him to say you should have sued the company and not him personally. But it is really up to him to raise it as an issue. If he wanted to use this argument he should have said so in his Defence. If he tries to make this point in court, you can explain your side of the story why you think you contracted with the individual and not with a limited company.

 

Personally I'd let the small claims process continue. Usually you are much better off having a CCJ against an individual rather than against a company.

 

I think he has raised it by saying he never received any money or entered into a contract. He's saying in effect the contract was with the company, the company received the money. Is there a particulalr reason you are suing him and not the company, e.g. evidence that the contract was with him in his personal capacity?

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...