Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Received a final demand today Final demand.pdf
    • Here is my final draft: I, XXXXXX, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in the claim and further to my set aside application dated 1 November 2022. The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts in person in the opening paragraph. It is my understanding they must serve notice to any hearsay evidence pursuant to CPR 33.2(1)(B) (notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence) and Section 2 (1) (A) of the Civil Evidence Act.   1.        The claimant failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis on the 2 February 2024 'The Claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents.' None of these documents were received by the court nor the defendant by that date.   2.        I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment.   As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights.  This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information).  The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.   3.        The alleged letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address.  I have attached a copy of my tenancy agreement which is marked ‘Appendix 1’ and shows I was residing at a difference address as of 11 December 2018 and was therefore not at the service address at the time the proceedings were served.  I have also attached an email from my solicitors to the Claimants solicitors dated 14 July 2022 which was sent to them requesting that they disclose the trace of evidence they utilised prior to issuing the proceedings against me.  This is marked ‘Appendix 2’.  The claimants solicitors did not provide me with these documents.   4.        Under The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 a Debt Buyer must undertake all reasonable enquiries to ensure the correct address of a debtor, this can be as simple as a credit file search. The Claimant failed to carry out such basic checks. Subsequently all letters prior to and including ,The Pre action Protocol letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 and the claim form dated 14th February 2020 were all served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018.   5.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020.   6.        Upon the discovery of the Judgement debt, I made immediate contact with the Court and the Claimant Solicitors, putting them on notice that I was making investigations in relation to the Judgement debt as it was not familiar to me.  I asked them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.   The correspondence to the Claimant Solicotors is attached and marked ‘Appendix 3’   7.        I then sent a Data Subject Access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided. Details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 4’and the copies of correspondence between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 5’.   8.        The claimant relies upon and exhibits a reconstituted version of the alleged agreement.   It is again denied that I have ever entered into an agreement with Barclaycard on or around 2000.  It is admitted that I did hold other credit agreements with other creditors and as such should this be a debt that was assigned to Barclaycard from another brand therefore the reconstituted agreement disclosed is invalid being pre April 2007 and not legally enforceable pursuant to HH Judge Waksman in Carey v HSBC 2009 EWHC3417.  Details of this are attached and marked ‘Appendix 6’.   The original credit agreement must be provided along with any reconstituted version on a modified credit agreement and must contain the names and address of debtor and creditor, agreement number and cancelation clause.   9.        Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to disclose a true executed legible agreement on which its claim relies upon and not try to mislead the court.   10.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the original assigned agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. Signed                 ………………………………………………….. Name                  XXXX Date                     30 April 2024
    • Only trying to help.  Ain't being nasty.  Some
    • Hi folks, I've just found previous documentation. I thought it had gone missing. I'd forgotten that I did appeal it through POPLA but I can't find the thread on here that, I assume, I posted for help. Appeal letter is dated 27/10/2020 with a rejection. I genuinely had forgotten about this so apologies for misleading you. A lot has happened in the years since the ticket was issued. We closed down a couple of businesses and moved to the opposite end of the country to retire. The documents I have are scanned copies. I no longer have the originals. The NTK is also in there. If there's anything you'd like to see, please let me know and I'll post them, although it probably won't be until tomorrow now, but I'll be looking in on this page tonight. Thank you for the responses so far
    • Hello! After emailing them I received this reply:   I have drafted the following, please would you be able to comment as to if you think it is correct/sufficient? "Thank you for your email.   Thanks you for confirming that the vehicle does not have these features as stated in the advertisement.    I am sure you are aware that the Consumer Rights Act 2015 provides the short term right to reject within 30 days. Statutory rights cannot be taken away from a consumer, and any attempt to do so is illegal.   Please can you advise how best to return the vehicle?" Thanks in advance!
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2844 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 agree with BA

post 24 Bankruptcy is something the council can use.

and as stated the limit before proceedings can be taken, is now £5000,

I think it was £700 before.

 

With regards to the Bailiff threatening Bankruptcy this quite a common threat along with Committal to prison,

It is not up to the EA if this happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 208
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Bankruptcy is one of the steps that the local authority can take with council tax arrears. However, given the increase in bankruptcy levels, the debt needs to be over £5,000.

 

Yes but not by a bailff using schedule 12 procedure.

 

It would be another enforcment path. An ea using sched 12 would not return the order after the seven day notice was sent.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with BA

post 24 Bankruptcy is something the council can use.

and as stated the limit before proceedings can be taken, is now £5000,

I think it was £700 before.

 

With regards to the Bailiff threatening Bankruptcy this quite a common threat along with Committal to prison,

It is not up to the EA if this happens.

 

Yes I agree they promise anything, not so often in writing though

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

This confirms they do use threatening behaviours to coerce payment as mentioned previously, though as DB rightly states, it is not so often they put this in writing.

 

The OP has been asked quite a few questions now, and appears to post very late at night, so perhaps it is best to wait until they return again to see what they say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

First of all this is definately for council tax arrears, not business rates, my premises is exempt.

 

I have contacted the council this morning, and they say that this enforcement went out to another company August 2015!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. However they sent it back to the council last month saying they could not contact me. How is this possible I have had cars parked outside my house, I have been living in the house, but have heard nothing at all from any bailiff company before. Wouldn't they have taken my cars? Anyway they then instructed Dukes to make an attempt at my place of work. They admit the business address error, but don't know why it happened.

 

As my business has really suffered over the last 2 years, and I nearly got evicted, I did apply for help with my council tax in November last year, but they made is so difficult, because I was self employed that I gave up eventually. Don't know whether this has any bearing on anything.

 

The exact wording of the letter is this

 

Final Notice: Council Tax Arrears

 

An Enforcement Agent (bailiff) has visited you home again today.

Your possessions are now at risk of being REMOVED.

 

Despite numver attempts to contact you we have still not received satisfactory response about you Council Tax Arrears

 

An Enforcement Agent (bailiff) has visited you home again today to take control of your goods and remove them for sale.

 

If you debt is not settled within 7 days of the date above, we will return your case with one of the following recommendations

 

Attachment of Earnings - taking the funds from you at source

Bankrupcy - this will affect your credit rating

Charging order on your property - your could be forced to sell you home

Commital - you could go to prison

 

FAILURE TO CONTACT US WILL BE TAKEN AS YOUR REFUSAL TO PAY.

 

At the top of the letter is the Dukes Refence, then Client Reference where it says Balance Due Today it is blank and where it says date is left blank.

 

There is 2 copies of this letter in the envelope, both exactly the same exept for one has my home address writen across it in pen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

First of all this is definately for council tax arrears, not business rates, my premises is exempt.

 

I have contacted the council this morning, and they say that this enforcement went out to another company August 2015!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. However they sent it back to the council last month saying they could not contact me. How is this possible I have had cars parked outside my house, I have been living in the house, but have heard nothing at all from any bailiff company before. Wouldn't they have taken my cars? Anyway they then instructed Dukes to make an attempt at my place of work. They admit the business address error, but don't know why it happened.

 

As my business has really suffered over the last 2 years, and I nearly got evicted, I did apply for help with my council tax in November last year, but they made is so difficult, because I was self employed that I gave up eventually. Don't know whether this has any bearing on anything.

 

The exact wording of the letter is this

 

Final Notice: Council Tax Arrears

 

An Enforcement Agent (bailiff) has visited you home again today.

Your possessions are now at risk of being REMOVED.

 

Despite numver attempts to contact you we have still not received satisfactory response about you Council Tax Arrears

 

An Enforcement Agent (bailiff) has visited you home again today to take control of your goods and remove them for sale.

 

If you debt is not settled within 7 days of the date above, we will return your case with one of the following recommendations

 

Attachment of Earnings - taking the funds from you at source

Bankrupcy - this will affect your credit rating

Charging order on your property - your could be forced to sell you home

Commital - you could go to prison

 

FAILURE TO CONTACT US WILL BE TAKEN AS YOUR REFUSAL TO PAY.

 

At the top of the letter is the Dukes Refence, then Client Reference where it says Balance Due Today it is blank and where it says date is left blank.

 

There is 2 copies of this letter in the envelope, both exactly the same exept for one has my home address writen across it in pen.

 

 

Is the house owned or rented ?

 

Is the ammount owed over £5000 ?

 

Do they no know your home address ? If you suspect they do you must remove all vehicles from in front of your house or on your drive away from the house or park on a neighbors drive.

 

Do you know what the judgment sum was on this debt ? The bill you have should contain fees which will drop off if the order goes back.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

If as it says on their letter, they visited my home why did they not post the letter there.

 

Perhaps they have the wrong home address ?

 

You need to tell them and the council that you have received no notices either from drakes (or the previous bailiff ?)

 

That in itself should stop the enforcment. The notices are required before any enforcement action.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

First of all this is definately for council tax arrears, not business rates, my premises is exempt.

 

I have contacted the council this morning, and they say that this enforcement went out to another company August 2015!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. However they sent it back to the council last month saying they could not contact me. How is this possible I have had cars parked outside my house, I have been living in the house, but have heard nothing at all from any bailiff company before. Wouldn't they have taken my cars?

 

Anyway they then instructed Dukes to make an attempt at my place of work. They admit the business address error, but don't know why it happened.

 

By coincidence, I have been assisting a couple today who thought that the enforcement company would have returned their debt back to the council by now so that they could pay the council tax direct to the council and therby evoid paying bailiff fees. The enforcement company have done no such thing and enforcment is continuing six months later !!! In light of other similar enquiries, I will be amending previous advice and will be telling debtors that an account would very likely not be returned to the council for approx 4-6 months.

 

You have also highlighted another area that has been debated on here. When an enforcement company return an account they do not write to the debtor !!

 

Is the council tax debt in relation to your current address? If not, this could explain the absence of previous correspondence.

 

What is your employment status (ie: self employed or employed)?

 

How much is the amount that Dukes are seeking from you?

 

PS: OOPS...I was typing without realising that another poster has asked some similar questions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry couldn't amend the above. I meant perhaps they had the wrong home address.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

B

 

PS: OOPS...I was typing without realising that another poster has asked some similar questions.

 

Its OK the grammar is better in yours.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the house owned or rented ?

 

Is the ammount owed over £5000 ?

 

Do they no know your home address ? If you suspect they do you must remove all vehicles from in front of your house or on your drive away from the house or park on a neighbors drive.

 

Do you know what the judgment sum was on this debt ? The bill you have should contain fees which will drop off if the order goes back.

 

House is owned, definately not over £5000. Yes they know my home address it was on one of the letters. One car is an old van, they can take that if they want, I can't get rid of it. The other car is one I use for business which is only worth about £900, so they can't take that as it is esscential to the running of my business. But I can park it elsewhere. The council lady did a lot of uming and erring, when I asked. She was not sure whether this years would be added on as once you become behind the whole year becomes due, so if one year £1200 if two Years £2400. The amount owed on the letter was left blank as was the date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry couldn't amend the above. I meant perhaps they had the wrong home address.

 

My home address was added in pen to one of the copies of the letters, but perhaps the previous bailiffs had the wrong address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By coincidence, I have been assisting a couple today who thought that the enforcement company would have returned their debt back to the council by now so that they could pay the council tax direct to the council and therby evoid paying bailiff fees. The enforcement company have done no such thing and enforcment is continuing six months later !!! In light of other similar enquiries, I will be amending previous advice and will be telling debtors that an account would very likely not be returned to the council for approx 4-6 months.

 

You have also highlighted another area that has been debated on here. When an enforcement company return an account they do not write to the debtor !!

 

Is the council tax debt in relation to your current address? If not, this could explain the absence of previous correspondence.

 

What is your employment status (ie: self employed or employed)?

 

How much is the amount that Dukes are seeking from you?

 

PS: OOPS...I was typing without realising that another poster has asked some similar questions.

 

I am self employed, and the council tax is for this address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The lady on the council was not in the least bothered about sending them to the wrong business address, and although they admitted this, she said it was not a preach of data protection in any way. When I said that the bailiff had walked around asked if anyone knew me and that they had given detials out over the phone to the company they sent the letter to in error. Her response was well they managed to contact you, and that is what we pay them for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dukes have not stated the amount, it is the council who says it could be 2400 if they decide to add on all of this years.

 

As you are self employed (and therefore not on a employers payroll), an attachment of earnings cannot be applied.

 

The council may only add this year's (2016/17) debt if they have been granted a Liability Order.

 

Very few Liability Orders have been granted by the courts for arrears of this year's council tax (2016/17). Have you received a summons yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BA

 

By coincidence, I have been assisting a couple today who thought that the enforcement company would have returned their debt back to the council by now so that they could pay the council tax direct to the council and therby evoid paying bailiff fees. The enforcement company have done no such thing and enforcment is continuing six months later !!! In light of other similar enquiries, I will be amending previous advice and will be telling debtors that an account would very likely not be returned to the council for approx 4-6 months.

 

Well you may have to alter the time scale a bit more, As I have been with Newlyns since the beginning,of September, But have only had 1 visit at 5am, and a lot of threatening letters.

 

Sorry for the off topic post

 

Leakie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes indeed. A charge on the house may be an option for them, if they have a liability order, the procedure is that they apply to the county court who will issue and interim order and give a date for a hearing to make it permanent. That would depend on what equity was on the proerty and what other charges you may have.

 

The exemption applies to tools or vehicles which, if they were absent would remove the debtors ability to perform his work.

 

This will not be just to take you to work.

 

The other option for them is to issue a warrant for committal, this initially will require you to attend the magistrates court and explain why you have not made a repayment on the debt.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will speak to the council again next week. When the more senior person comes off her holiday.

 

In the mean time are Dukes likely to call at my workplace again, or will it just go back to the council after 7 days as per the letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will speak to the council again next week. When the more senior person comes off her holiday.

 

In the mean time are Dukes likely to call at my workplace again, or will it just go back to the council after 7 days as per the letter.

 

I should think it will be a distinct possibility they will call at your home, usual procedure lock doors and keep cars and anything valuable outside under lock and key. unlikely they will call at your work.

 

After seven days if it goes back, and is closed, they cannot call.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a thought, but if you drive your car to work, do not park it on a road where they may spot it..

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dukes have not stated the amount, it is the council who says it could be 2400 if they decide to add on all of this years.

 

To add this years you would have had to have defaulted on payment and they obtain another Liability Order against you.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In your shoes I would be making complaints as the Council do not appear to have a clue what they are talking about. At best Dukes are being evasive as they will have been instructed by the Council to collect £XXX. Have you thought about contacting your local Councillor(s) - do it over the weekend and they can attack this for you first thing Monday morning - best initial contact is by phone.

Please consider making a small donation to help keep this site running

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...