Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

Stolen phone bill £1,888 , unlimited liability. Vodafone - help ** Settled **


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3450 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

Having read this through,it's apparent Peopod's difficulties are because Vodafone are doing exactly what they said they would- 'we won't discuss it,contact us again and we won't reply to you'.Vodafone simply will not reply to anything,like they said.

 

 

Lee,

Communicating with Vodafone is proving very difficult .

- I've done as you've asked and sent two emails into you using the 'help' link you provided and had no response to either.

Because Vodafone said if you tried to contact them,they would not reply

- Yesterday you told me you couldn't see these emails, why?

- You also said that I should have had an auto reply, I didn't, Why?

Because Vodafone said if you tried to contact them,they would not reply

- You said in your communication on here yesterday after I'd sent yet another message to you on here yesterday asking if you received my message posted on Friday at 10.40,: 'If you didn't receive this, email me again via the Contact us here and make sure that the code WRT135 - CAGicon Forum is quoted in the subject line.. Why wouldn't I receive and 'automated' email if that is how the system is set up?

Because Vodafone said if you tried to contact them,they would not reply

 

- I sent you details, via this forum, of duplicate/same time calls on Friday at 10.40hrs. I've had no response from you regarding this, Why?

Because Vodafone said that if you contacted them,they would not reply

- I asked you again in my post yesterday, via this forum, but still no response regarding this, just a message to say you didn't receive my emails Why?

Because Vodafone said that if you contacted them,they would not reply

-I realise that you probably don't want to discuss issues on here directly but I can't seem to find any other way of communicating with you outside this forum

Because Vodafone said that if you contacted them,they would not reply

- On Thursday I sent another message on here asking for the details of your Spanish Mobile partner, and again asked for this yesterday, I've had no response to either of these requests, why?

Because Vodafone said that if you contacted them,they would not reply.

 

I've emailed you again, to your help line provided in your message, but given that I did this 6 days ago, didn't receive an auto reply, I don't see why my emails should get through this time round here

Oh they're getting through-Vodafone are just refusing to reply to any of them

.The Deadlock hold expires tomorrow and so far and regardless of how I try and communicate with Vodafone, I just don't make any headway.

There's no way you'll be able to-Vodafone has stated they not discuss anything,not reply to any contact,not even acknowledge any emails you sent.

 

I didn't want to post this on here as I'd really rather just stay with the issue I have but given the above, I'm running out of ideas of how else I can communicate.
The problem is Vodafone have said do not communicate with us-we're not interested,we couldn't care less,we won't even do the courtesy of replying.It's like a kid sticking his fingers in his ears and saying la-la-la can't hear what you're saying,so it doesn't count

 

So it doesn't matter what Peopod does,if they send emails to Lee,if they reply with the automated reference numbers,Vodafone will continue their 'if you contact us,we will refuse to discuss it or reply to it' stance.

 

That might be helpful if the debt collectors get called in-first thing will be to tell them 'the phone was stolen and used fraudulently-I reported this to Vodafone,who refused to discuss anything at all about it'.

 

The phone companies have a duty to assist customers with difficulties-in fact they will bang on about it in their literature-'if you have a problem,we will do our best to help you' so Vodafone's silent treatment goes directly against that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Get a PAC code off them and move to another network, Life is too short to be messed around like this.

If they don't want to discuss the matter with you it shows what a bad company they really are.

 

The debt will go to a debt collectors and on your credit file but most debt collectors are easy to get rid of.

 

George

Link to post
Share on other sites

If customer moved network with PAC code, then Vodafone would probably increase the debt further due to it being a contract phone and charge the customer for failing to stay within contract.

 

It may be that the account holder doesn't want their credit record to be trashed by Vodafone and Vodafones lack of customer care which is shown in this thread.

 

Why should the customer have a bad credit record due to the fact that Vodafone has not cared for its customer in order to prevent the customer receiving a high bill in respect of the stolen phone calls?

 

Vodafone can not even compromise, ie - charge wholesale price for the stolen calls, they are intent on making a profit from stolen phone calls, so intent on this that they refuse to converse with the customer.

If I've given you advice, then it is just my thoughts / opinions - doesn't mean I am right!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bankfodder, I'm trying to send you a PM but it won't accept it?

 

Alternatively you could email [email protected] (no gaps).

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, Vodafone called today to tell me they've dropped all charges...

 

A massive thank you to everyone on this forum who have helped us with such useful advice and links. It's the first time I've used anything like this and it's been fascinating to see how there really is no 'i' in team! I've learnt a great deal during this whole process.

 

Lee, I know your hands were tied but thanks for your input, appreciated.

 

Bankfodder, thanks for your prompts!

 

Best regards,

 

Peopod

Link to post
Share on other sites

For the second time this week, I have to say WOW. Well done Vodafone (not very often I say that)

 

Lee has to follow company procedure and he does use common sense to sway opinion with his bosses but as you say, hands tied does happen on a regular basis.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Peopod

 

Well Done, you could send them an itemised bill for your time, phone calls, letters, research etc.

 

They could have dealt with this matter straight away, but chose not to, instead they caused you stress and anxiety, even refusing to speak to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rebell1, It's certainly been very interesting on just about every front and I've learnt a great deal about how people can help each other, even when there isn't anything in it for them. That can't be bad, only a good way to live and so although it's been very stressful, it's been very valuable as well.

 

My son is very grateful to everyone who has helped us and asked me to pass on his thanks...

 

Peopod

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really pleased that it is resolved. I will put my hands up and say I didn't think you had a leg to stand on legally (morally is a different matter) and I was pleasantly surprised to see you get a result

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Peopod

 

I have sent you an email to your registered address.

 

Please check your spam folder.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...