Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
    • Okay please go through the disclosure very carefully. I suggest that you use the technique broadly in line with the advice we give on preparing your court bundle. You want to know what is there – but also very importantly you want to know what is not there. For instance, the email that they said they sent you before responding to the SAR – did you see that? Is there any trace of of the phone call that you made to the woman who didn't know anything about SAR's? On what basis was the £50 sent to you? Was it unilateral or did they offer it and you accepted it on some condition? When did they send you this £50 cheque? Have you banked it? Also, I think that we need to start understanding what you have lost here. Have you lost any money – and if so how much? Send the SAR to your bank as advised above
    • In anticipation of lodging my court claim next Weds 1 May (14 days after advising P2G that was my deadline for them to settle my claim) I have completed my first draft POC as below: Claim Claim number: xxxxx Reference: P2G MAY 2024   Claimant xxxxx   Defendant Parcel2Go 1A Parklands Lostock Bolton BL6 4SD  Particulars of Claim The defendant has failed to arrange for the safe delivery of the claimant's parcel containing a 8 secondhand golf clubs (valued at £265) that was sent to a UK address using their delivery service (P2G Reference xxxxx). The defendant contracted Evri to deliver the parcel (Evri Reference xxxxx) and refuses to reimburse the claimant on the grounds that the claimant did not purchase their secondary insurance contract. The defendant seeks to exclude their liability in breach of section 57 Consumer Rights Act. The secondary insurance contract is in breach of section 72. The claimant seeks reimbursement of £265, plus P2G fees of £9.10, plus postage costs for two first class letters to P2G of £2.70, plus court fees, plus interest. The claimant claims interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% a year from xxxxx to xxxxxx on £276.80 and also interest at the same rate up to the date of judgment or earlier payment at a daily rate of £xxxx   Details of claim Amount claimed £276.80 I look forward to your thoughts and comments guys! As ever, many thanks - G59    
    • Hmm, that's strange how they got my email then.  I assume the below is ok to send to DCBL, Nicky?  Hello, I am writing regarding our ongoing dispute and the upcoming court claim reference xxxxxxxx. To ensure fairness and transparency in our communications leading up to the court hearing, I request that you use postal mail exclusively for all further correspondence related to this claim. Please refrain from sending any communication or documents via email. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation. If you have any questions or need clarification, please feel free to contact me via postal mail at the address provided above. Yours sincerely, xxxx
  • 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 
        • 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

SLC[still paying] to Erudio now drydens refering to an old 1996 CCJ + wanting more money


Zara Rudkin
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3454 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

I wonder if I could get some advice?

Apologies if I am in the wrong place,

but just joined so I can try to resolve my problem.

 

This week I received a letter from Drydensfairfax asking for me to complete a expenditure sheet

as my student loan has been passed to them.

 

It also says that a CCJ was awarded against me on 11 November 1996

(I had two student loans taken out in 1995 and 1996).

I am not aware of the CCJ and would have been when I was living is student accommodation

so I assume letters didn't catch up with me.

 

In approximately 2002 SLC tracked me down,

probably after I got a mortgage,

and I made an agreement with them to pay £10 per month as I was in between work.

 

I have never defaulted on this and the money just goes out direct debit and I every year get a statement.

 

That is the only contact I have from them until

 

March this year when they wrote to inform me my debt had been sold to Erudio.

It said nothing was changing so I thought no more about it and the direct debit continued to go out.

 

Then mid october I got a letter from Drydensfairfax saying the loan had been sold to them.

I must have been busy when I opened the letter and just skimmed it

and took in that nothing had changed. Now the letter today which seems quite threatening.

 

It also says that I can't defer my loan if I wanted to because it is now a CCJ,

is that true as I am currently unemployed and if I could defer I would try to?

 

I am want to know what to do next as I am unsure why the threatening letter has come when I am making payments.

Could the payments be still going to SLC and not transferring to Drydensfairfax?

 

Do I complete the expenditure and offer to continue to pay £10 (there is a remaining £1375).

What can I do about the CCJ (it has never caused a problem when getting mortgages

but I will be needing to remortgage soon when my fixed rate expires and don't want it to cause a problem).

 

Sorry for the long post and I hope someone can help me.

 

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

So they are claiming that a County Court Judgment was made against you in 1996 . Surely SLC would have advised you of this when you entered into the payment plan ? I wonder if it might be worth sending them a Subject Access Request (SAR) which should provide all the information they have on you. Any CCJ should show up in that paperwork.

 

If you have a written statement that "nothing will change", then I think you should simply send that to Dryden Fairfax and not complete their I&E - I will however, ask one of the site team to look in and advise further :)

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb 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.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

usual trick by drydens

 

 

lots of threads here already on exactly the same issues.

 

 

drydens have simply sent out 1000's of letter

to everyone that got an SLC CCJ

and never paid.

 

 

let me read your post and i'll come back.

 

 

usyal response is to ignore them

 

 

its a phishing trip trying to spoof you into paying

 

 

they weren't the claimant and cant enforce the CCJ

no matter what they say.

 

 

be right back.

 

 

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

ok I see yours is slightly diff to the rest.

 

 

you've been paying SLC since the CCJ

we might have to play this differently.

and getting annual statements as you should be too. [that's rare!!]

 

 

I'd suspect you could call drydens bluff here

and this might well help all the others too whereby drydens are pulling this stunt.

 

 

I'd poss write to drydens

 

 

clearly stating that the judgement of the 1996 CCJ

clearly states you must pay the claimant [sLC]

the sum of £10PCM

 

 

until/unless this judgement is varied by the court by the claimant

you will continue your payments.

 

 

you DID get a notice of assignment from erudio and SLC a few weeks ago?

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've not had an assintment from Erudio saying it's gone to Dtydensfairfax

 

You wont have .. Dryden Fairfax do NOT own the debt, they are simply acting on behalf of Erudio :)

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb 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.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, just to point out, I've not been paying since the CCJ, but for about the last 10 years

 

 

ah so you could be on a winner here

 

 

sorry read you post wrong

 

 

so 'some' payment to SLC

[if it was against the CCJ loan or not might be important] was resumed to SLC 2002

 

 

if it was 6yr after the CCJ it would be interesting.

 

 

you say you have SLC statements....

 

 

is the account number the same one that drydens are claiming has the CCJ...

 

 

play along here with me please..

 

 

sorry for the questions..

 

 

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

Sorry I haven't got all the statements, only the last one.

 

 

I stupidly had a clear out about a year ago and because it was just an ongoing payment without any issues I didn't think I'd need them.

 

But looking at the statement from sept 2013,

 

 

letter with assignment notice and

 

 

then letter from drysden

 

 

all the account numbers are different

Link to post
Share on other sites

is their an actual SLC account number on the drydens phishing letter

or just their or rodeo's puppet ref number

 

 

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

great so

 

 

in my eyes all you've got is a phishing letter

 

 

just like everyone else

[that I hope you are reading about in this forum]

 

 

claiming that because there is an old CCJ kicking around

 

 

they have some magic power to now demand money from you....urm...no they don't!

 

 

I know you've prob read about it

but its worthy to underline in case you have not

 

 

.......................

 

 

just like other times when SLC stuff got sold on..

 

 

Honours Student Loans

 

 

Thesis {Link Financial DCA in sheeps clothing]

 

 

Eruido [Arrows DCA in sheeps clothing]

 

 

 

 

they are in all effect a DCA

they ARE NOT BAILIFFS

 

 

and have

 

 

NO SUCH LEGAL POWERS.

 

 

take everything they send through in any format from any of their 'group' names [drydens are arrows]

 

 

with a VERY VERY LARGE pinch of salt!!

 

 

.................

 

 

there is ONE case on here

[whereby restons have supposedly got a CCJ on an SLC loan sold to rodeo by default]

 

 

but to be honest I'm not at present believing that thread yet as the OP is dragging their heels

coming fwd with the correct answers or ANY answers to pointed questions

 

 

 

so it COULD be a fake [not unknown!!]

 

 

so going by that

 

 

there is no evidence any of these drydens letters are anything more than another phishing attempt

to spoof a mug into paying up...don't!!

 

 

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

opps one last bit.

 

 

the Erudio notice of assignment MUST mention the correct number from the original creditor

else how the BEEP do you know what 'debt' its a bout/

 

 

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

Yes the notice of assignment has a different ref.

 

 

this was sent from slc.

 

 

That ref has not been referred to since.

 

 

So should I just continue the direct debit of £10 per month,

even though I don't actually know where it is going too?

 

Thanks for all your help with this

Link to post
Share on other sites

point of note

it wasn't sent from SLC

 

 

it was sent from arrows using an slc logo.

 

 

bet it was in the same envelope as the letter from arroes informing you they had been sold the debt.

 

 

to be honest, I question the wisdom of continuing to pay this.

 

 

if there was a period of 6yrs from the CCJ

[though slc I bet made no ref to the CCJ at all]

or from your last deferment?

then it was sb'd when they spoofed you into starting to pay them again.

 

 

you SURE it was SLC, not link pretending to be the SLC?

 

 

I've seen or eremember little eveidence here that slc ever phoned people to chase payment

esp after a good number of years.

 

 

something smells here.

 

 

I'd p'haps be getting an sar off to them

 

 

get all the facts.

 

 

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

yes

 

 

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...