Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you still have not answered the above. .......................... as for their letter and your reply: the 1st single paragraph detailing why you were reported is the only part specific to you. the rest is the bulk std TfL template letter that everyone gets when reported. 3 does not apply to you anyway as the report is one of detected fraudulent misuse of a freedom pass not in your name, not a case of a pass you held that you could not produce at the time. mail them your begging letter, but lets see it first.
    • Hi HB,  Have you come across cases where there are no mitigating reasons as to why TfL should not proceed with a prosecution?   
    • hope everyone can see this (might be issues if not UK connection)   Post Office lawyer was a jack of all trades, but failed his own | ... WWW.COMPUTERWEEKLY.COM Post Office IT scandal inquiry hears how a lawyer was at the centre of the Post Office’s attempts to prevent problems with its IT system...  
    • as if a lawyer, let alone a senior one wouldn't have full documentation - if she claims she hasn't - claw back all the payments made to her   https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/post-office-inquiry-live-former-gc-susan-crichton-gives-evidence/5119453.article?clearcache=1
    • Id start by submitting a formal Subject Access Request to the local authority. State that you want all data including telephone recordings.   They'll have a month to provide you with the data and recordings then
  • 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

Scarlet Services, SMS Legal, U Legal - cold call


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2854 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

Well I had a very thoughtful call today from a nice man called Geraint - and he was a junior adviser for a company called U Legal which I had never heard of before but he directed me to the Ministry of Justice website and I found their entry there - https://www.claimsregulation.gov.uk/details.aspx/30643/Scarlet_Marketing_Services_Ltd/?search=simple&business=&authID=crm30643&sector=-1&county=-1&status=-1

 

… although he didn't mention anything about them being investigated by the MOJ – even though it was written at the bottom of their entry "Scarlet Marketing Services Ltd is being investigated by the Claims Management Regulator under Regulation 35 of the Compensation (Claims Management Services) Regulations 2006" , but I decided not to refer to it because I didn't want to embarrass him – he seemed like such a nice man. But of course he was only a junior adviser and he kept on talking about the senior claims adviser and so eventually I was put through to her and her name was Carly but in fact she told me there was an E in the name and in fact it was Carley. It's always embarrassing when you spell somebody's name isn't it?

 

Anyway, the call started with simply an automated announcement telling me about some PPI money that might be due and telling me to press number five if I was interested. I have a feeling that this is called a "broadcast" telephone message. It's funny really because I thought that I noticed on the claims management regulator website that that broadcast telephone calls were not allowed – but maybe I got it wrong.

 

Also, through the call they kept referring to the fact that I was on an "opt in" list. I kept on saying that I didn't think I was and I could never remember opting into anything but they said that I was on the list and that's why they phone me. They kept on repeating this a lot – opt in – opt in – opt in.

 

They also told me that Lloyds bank was the worst offender of all the PPI mis-selling companies. I have to say that this gave me some confidence because I'm sure that it is probably true and it made me want to trust them – but not quite.

 

They told me that Lloyds had been fined £33 billion for PPI mis-selling - but when I queried this, he said that in fact they had set aside £33 billion to repay PPI mis-selling claims. I was astonished. That is a huge amount of money.

 

They also said that they got much better results in much quicker than the ombudsman. That amazed me as well because I thought that somewhere in the claims regulator guidelines, that they were not allowed to say this. Maybe I got that wrong too. Also, they said something about my claim going to their legal team.

 

One thing that puzzled me though was that I kept on asking them how much it would all cost and they seem very reluctant to give any answers on that until I asked so many times that Geraint put me through to Carley, the senior claims adviser and she gradually gave me the information – but after a lot of questions. They really didn't seem to be very clear either about what would happen if eventually it got so long that I wanted to part company with them. She seemed to be saying that that wasn't possible.

 

Luckily, I recorded the whole thing.

 

 

U_Legal PPI_Cold_call.mp3

 

 

 

If you feel that you can listen to 34 minutes of the conversation, then maybe you might be able to tell me if you think they broke any of the rules which are displayed on the claim regulator's website

- https://www.gov.uk/guidance/claims-management-company-regulations-guidance-and-legislation

 

 

A copy of this recording is being sent to the Ministry of Justice so that they can take it into account during their investigation – and hopefully exonerate U Legal and those nice people Gerald and Carly whoops Carley sorry.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By the way, this call was recorded on a Samsung mobile telephone using the Automatic Call Recorder app from the Google play store which is available for free. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.appstar.callrecorderpro&hl=en

the sound quality was excellent although there was a slight imbalance on the two sides of the conversation.

It was processed slightly using Adobe Audition to normalise both sides and also to reduce the volume slightly. However, the recording was perfectly good as it was without any processing and you could hear both sides perfectly.

 

We give lots of advice on this forum about recording your calls. You should always record your calls. If you receive calls on your android mobile phone then you should install an automatic call recorder so that you never have to think about it.

 

You should always record your calls. You will never regret it if you do. If you don't record your calls, then you will regret it. Sooner or later you will regret it. Whoops

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are the ones that use bogus numbers or even hide their number or with old it

 

They've been doing this press 5 thing for years

 

Been fined twice now I seem to remember

But simply change names

And start again

 

Clever you got their name

Been trying for years...

 

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

Very strange, because it had me thinking back to this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?439619-Cold-PPI-reclaim-call-from-those-nice-people-at-Rock-Law&p=4676713#post4676713

 

And I notice that the telephone message is pretty well the same and ask you to press 5 if you want to talk to somebody. I wonder if there is some standard piece of software and always chooses that number – or whether these companies are somehow related. I think we should be told.

 

Also, I recognise rapid references to "legal team". Of course, this could mean anything – but on the other hand some people might easily believe that there is some heavyweight group of legal professionals – maybe even solicitors who are all set to take your case and to pounce upon the naughty PPI mis-sellers

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...