Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Include that in your witness statement along with that letter as an exhibit.
    • Yup, well so far they have lied to me about responding to a CCA,  are threatening me with a default notice that they don't have, produced a knocked up version of my NOA, sent me 29 pages of spew for an agreement. No wonder they pay 5 p in the pound for that crap.
    • Paragraph 2. I think there should be further down and also you should make the point that the payment to was made unilaterally and without the imposition of any conditions. Paragraph 3 – this is unnecessary because you are not claiming as an entitled third-party. This worries me because it makes me feel that you haven't fully read around because this is a paragraph which you would include where you were suing EVRi as a beneficial third party because you had actually made your contract with Packlink or some other broker. I think you need to revisit and do some more reading. I'm afraid I have a sense that you have simply copied this from somebody else's witness statement without understanding that it wasn't necessary. Please can you post the amended draft. Other than the suggestions above, it looks okay – but let's see it again for a further appraisal. In terms of the evidence, parties bundle, I think it might be an idea to start off with the correspondence with EVRi and then go onto the other evidence. You will have to amend the index page accordingly. You could shorten this bit. Take 19 is pretty well blank and you may as well miss it out also, there seems to be some repetition of emails and the email chain. I think will be worth going through and getting rid of duplicates if you can. 49 pages is a bit long and it would be a good idea to try and reduce the number. I have a feeling that 50 pages as the County Court limit anyway. The judge will be happier with you if the bundle is smaller. Maybe you could reduce the size of some of the images or messages et cetera. You have got several messages which straddle onto a second page so that things like sign off information and standard confidentiality information become orphans. A bit of manipulation and they could be joined to their parents I think. Page 31 as an example. So is page 19. You may only be up to shorten the whole thing by 56 pages – but I think it would be a good idea. 56 pages is, after all, 10%. If you can do more then so much the better
    • Investment by Dutch brewing giant will create 1,000 new jobs and reopen dozens of closed pubsView the full article
  • 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

Creation Finance have moved Defaulted Date


Taz11
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2766 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

Thanks Silverfox,

 

I'll take a look for the file they sent, and if its not available I'll SAR. Much appreciated. I'll let you know ;) and feedback.

Regards

 

Sorry, by CRA, do you mean a credit referance agency, equifax, experian etc... or the original debtor ?

 

thnx

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes, Credit Reference Agency. The original creditor would (should) also have this information so if you're feeling cash rich, you could SAR them too

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

old thread merged

DN post 10 help

 

 

think it will..

send them a copy:lol:

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

thanks dx100uk,

 

I obviously have the original of that default ( as I scanned it for that post ) as I filed everything, and it will show all the original details :)

 

How do I go about putting this in a letter now to Creation, stating that the default has been moved from the original date on the default notice !!!!. I can't wait to send this letter :)

 

@gwebstech, I heard nothing, and the letter from creation proves they have no cca ;)

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

old thread merged

DN post 10 help

 

 

think it will..

send them a copy:lol:

 

Game, set and match

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no, I didn't get a reply, no CCJ or further correspondence.

 

How do I now put this in writing to Creation or do I go straight to the ICO as I have proof of the original default notice ?

Thank you :)

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

simply send them a letter with a copy of that DN

demanding that they correct the CRA file entries

give them 14 days

or you will raise a complaint with the ICO

 

 

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

Thanks dx100uk,

 

I'm getting on to it. Will keep thread updated. G'night ppl, much appreciated. ;)

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Ok, sorry people,

this had taken a back seat as it was the last one on my list,

and I had to try and find ( amongst numerous boxes ) the original default.

 

 

I've now found it and it was definitely dated the 6th January 2009 with the same account number that is on the CRA'S which had been renewed on the 8th June 2016 at my old address.!!!!!

 

This is my letter to Creation, would/could you please advise if this is ok, and I'll send it recorded delivery.

 

Creation Finance Limited

Chadwick House

Blenheim Court

Solihull

West Midlands

B91 2AA.

 

October 10, 2016

 

Mr *******

*******

*******

*******

*******

 

Account Number : ****************

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I formely request with immediate effect, that you remove the above account from all Credit Reference Agencies. You will note from your own correspondence, that the default was issued on the 6th January 2009. ( Copy Enclosed )This, in effect would remain on the credit reference agency files for 6 years until 6th January 2015, and then be removed.

 

The default has been logged again on the 8th June 2016 at an address I have not been living at for the past 4 years.

I believe this action is frowned upon by the Information Commissioners Office and if you choose to ignore my request to remove the account, I will initiate action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, and The Financial Ombudsman, and providing said authorities with the original Default Notice provided by yourselves.

 

Please comply within 14 days with my request and advise me accordingly in writing that the account has been removed from all Credit Reference Agencies.

Sincerely,

 

Mr *******

 

Any advice appreciated, Thanks Taz

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

please/request/ ..no .you demand..

 

 

else you'll seek compensation

you complain to the ICO

remove the rest

makes you sound like you don't know what you are talking about if you list uncle tom cobbly and all.

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

Any better ?, thanks

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I demand with immediate effect, that you remove the above account from all Credit Reference Agencies. You will note from your own correspondence, that the default was issued on the 6th January 2009. ( Copy Enclosed )This, in effect would remain on the credit reference agency files for 6 years until 6th January 2015, and then be removed.

 

The default has been logged again on the 8th June 2016 at an address I have not been living at for the past 4 years.

I believe this action is frowned upon by the Information Commissioners Office and if you choose to ignore my demand to remove the account, I will seek compensation,forward the original default notice, and file a report with the Information Commissioners Office.

Comply within 14 days of receipt of this letter with my demand and advise me accordingly in writing that the account has been removed from all Credit Reference Agencies.

Sincerely,

 

Mr *******

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having rather embarrassingly been refused credit by a leading financial institution recently

I was advised to consult my credit file.

 

 

I was disturbed to find yourselves - Creation Finance have amended an original default registered in jan 2009

to a new date of 08/05/2013 Thus placing an account back on my credit file when it had already fallen off.

 

I am advised by information from the ICO to write to you giving you 14 days to removed the new default

and thus the account as the debt has already been originally defaulted more than 6yrs ago.

 

 

Should you fail to do so I will invoke a complaint with the ICO

seeking a suitable financial redress for the inconvenience and distress caused by your unlawful actions.

 

 

yours

 

 

 

 

For your reference I enclosed a copy of the original default notice.

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

Thanks for that, short and sweet is the best way to go.............made mine look like an essay. Really appreciate your input. Copied and pasted and will be winging its way to creation. Will let you know ;)

 

Thanks again,

 

Taz :)

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...