Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Another one. Apparently this has been hushed up for about three months. They're working through their majority quite fast with all the sackings. Not that they've done anything about Menzies yet but he sounds like a blackmail risk. Here's the original article.   Revealed: Tory MP allegedly demanded campaign cash to pay ‘bad people’ ARCHIVE.PH archived 18 Apr 2024 07:32:33 UTC  
    • and another one   MP Mark Menzies loses Tory whip as party investigates claims he misused funds "According to a source close to Mr Menzies, the MP had met a man on an online dating website and gone to the man’s flat, before subsequently going with another man to a second address where he continued drinking. He was sick at one point and several people at the address demanded £5,000, claiming it was for cleaning up and other expenses." The sum, which rose to £6,500, was eventually paid by his office manager from her personal bank account and subsequently reimbursed from funds raised from donors   Never mind losing whip - how about criminal charges   MP Mark Menzies loses Tory whip as party investigates claims he misused funds WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK The Fylde MP is alleged to have used campaign funds to pay off ‘bad people’ and cover medical expenses   ALSO According to the The Times, £14,000 given by donors for use on Tory campaign activities was transferred to Mr Menzies’ personal bank accounts and used for private medical expenses. The MP, who is one of Rishi Sunak’s trade envoys, is also said to have called his 78-year-old former campaign manager at 3.15am one day in December, claiming he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death”.   Hes supposed to use funding from Taxpayers and doners for a life of service, not funding a life of drink and debauchery Hope his parliamentary expenses are also investigated.   In fact, perhaps Mr Bates next role in life should be as an independent investigator of Parliamentary expenses?
    • He asked for that one, didn't he?
    • Trump was unable to make it through the first day of court without falling asleep on Monday, which sparked a whole host of jokes, memes and even a new nickname, 'Dozy Don'    
    • The shift to card and contactless technology in the past decade has been rapid - not just in Britain, but in all sorts of remote pockets of the world. This is yet a further sign of it.View 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

Utility Warehouse applying for warrant


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2731 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

Hi all, I'm hoping someone with knowledge can help.

 

UH are applying for a warrant to enter and fit a prepayment meter. The amount I owe is 349.65. This includes £200 security deposit.

 

Ive got a bit behind but will be able to pay the actual 149.65 I owe next week. They are saying they wont accept that and will pursue the applucation on the basis that I still owe them 200.00.

 

Can they do this? They were the supplier when i moved in and i told them I'd be happy to pay by dd but they wouldn't accept. Legally, is this 200 even a debt??

 

Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello thescribe and welcome to CAG.

 

First question, do you agree with the debt? You're happy that that is based on actual meter readings and not estimated readings? How long has this debt been building up for?

 

Secondly, please can you define what you mean by a 'security deposit'? I know that utility firms like to have some money coming their way before you get your first bill (e.g. through direct debit), but the phrase 'security deposit' sounds a bit odd.

 

How does this 'security deposit' normally show up on your bills?

If they intend to use it to go towards your energy usage,

I would think it would show up as a credit.

 

 

If it's some sort of deposit that you will get back after the end of your contract (like you would for renting a property),

it would be seperated from your actual debt, though quite why a utility firm would do something like this,

I'm not too sure (maybe another Cagger will know more).

 

I think that if you agree to a payment plan, UW have to hold off any debt collection action unless you break the agreement, but I think the key thing is how this security deposit is actually used.

Any pearls of wisdom that I give on the CAG forums is based on previous experiences and knowledge I have gained from being on these forums.

Link to post
Share on other sites

find out what court and when they are going for this entry warrant is and object to it.

 

 

let them know you will be turning up in person to object and the chances are they wont want to go through with it.

 

 

Agree about what the deposit is all about, BT used to try that one when I lived in brixton but they got an earwigging for it when it become known that it was a blanket demand rather than based upon an individuals trck record.

 

 

If you can pay off the due balance then do so.

do it via your bank or online banking and they cant return it without breaking the law when it comes to then giving evidence to a court.

 

Then change energy supplier, they cnat refuse that.

Octopus are pretty good if they deal with your area.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi all,

 

I have been taken to court by the utility warehouse for gas and electricity and it is being dealt with by Grosvenor Legal Services (Bailiffs).

 

The breakdown of the debt they are chasing is:

 

Gas/elect: £150

Deposit: £200

 

I understand that they can chase for the money outstanding for the actual usage, but can they claim for the deposit of £200?

 

This is the deposit they asked for when I moved into the property and I have never agreed to pay. Surely it's not an actual 'debt' thus not subject to any recovery action??

 

Help please!

Link to post
Share on other sites

old and new thread merged for full history

 

 

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

Circumstances now are that I contacted them and told them I would pay on the 29th of this month. They agreed but said they would go ahead with the court action in any case and have the warrant in hand then if I failed to pay.

 

I intend to pay on the 29th but I need to know;

 

1. Do I have to pay the full amount of the claim? As I said it's £150 for usage and another £200 for a security deposit

 

2. Do I need to pay up to the current date, or do I just need to pay the sum outstanding on their initial claim?

 

3. Is there anywhere I can check to find out if they actually went ahead and got the warrant?

 

Thank you soooo much!

Link to post
Share on other sites

so they got a CCJ against you too...hence the bailiffs?

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

so they got a CCJ against you too...hence the bailiffs?

 

No I don't think so,

they applied for a warrant of entry under the Gas and Electricity Boards Act 1954 to fit a pre-payment meter.

 

 

The problem is that there is a clause in my rental contract that I can't have one.

 

 

I'm happy to pay the arrears but I don't think it can be legal to get a warrant based on £350 of arrears when in fact the arrears are only £150?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so they have the warrant?

 

 

you didn't contest it?

 

 

as for the £200

this sounds pretty std for UW

 

 

get your LL to contact UW directly.

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

It is pretty standard for them, agreed. However, it is not a debt so should not form the basis of a claim I would have thought.

 

I have contacted the bailiffs today and they are refusing to let me have a copy of the warrant that was granted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...