Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi all   I will dive straight into my scenario.    I have a personal Barclaycard credit card that I defaulted on in first half of 2015.  This debt has been bought out by Hoist in 2019.  I have not made payments since the first half of 2015 to the account. I am pretty sure I have not acknowledged the debt to the DCA that occasionally contacted me since then The six year anniversary of the default will arrive in the first half of 2021. I recently received a 'Letter of Claim' from Howard Cohen Solicitors informing me of Hoists intention to issues proceedings in the County Court for the outstanding amount. The letter states I have 30 days in which to reply.  The letter states that it is written in accordance with the Pre-action Protocol for Debt claims. They have provided a brief summary of the outstanding debt but not the original signed agreement.  My feeling is that the pressure is being ramped up because of the upcoming six year anniversary of the default.   I am not sure whether I should; A). Ignore the letter (if so what are the consequences). B). Stall for a little more time until the six year anniversary of the default arrives, and whether engaging with them too has its own set of consequences. C). Pay too much attention to the six year anniversary of the default  - as I am not sure if a debt becomes automatically statute barred after six years in which I have not acknowledged that debt.    Like many, I have been hit by Covid economically.  I have not worked most of this year.  I am operating at substantial loss with funds fast drying up. The work position doesn't seem to be changing any time soon. I am not claiming benefits or anything.   Any suggestions for plan of action would be gratefully received.   Thank you   Arthur M.                        
    • Hi Manxman, Yes, the contract was signed on-line and I'm relying on s31 of CCR.  I think what you are alluding to is the fact that if the contract started within the first 14days and if it was commenced with the expressed consent of the consumer (on a durable medium such as letter or email not phone call or webforms), then the consumer has to be pay for the portion of the services that was provided. Also, if the service has already been completed (which is not the case here as the service will be completed after 12months from the commencement of the tenancy which never commenced) then, full service fee is payable. In this case, no express consent was given - I have checked all my emails to them so they cannot charge for the portion of the services either i.e. arranging some viewings and finding a prospective tenant. In fact, I offered to pay for the reference check costs but they want it all. There was an implementing guidance on CCR2013 which categorically says that the regulation applies to letting agent's services - I have attached it here. At the end of the day, regulations are regulations and if anything, consumer is recognized as the weaker bargaining party as the contract was created by the business. Please google Robertson vs Swift - case prior to CCR 2013 came in where the supreme court ruled in favour of the consumer and went above and beyond what the regulation said at the time (although it derived some criticism).  bis-13-1368-consumer-contracts-information-cancellation-and-additional-payments-regulations-guidance (1).pdf
    • No I didn't, in 2018 my laptop was unable to download open office.   I have attached the ci sheet from 2017, with all the charges listed up to then.   StatIntSheet v101 Charges V2.xls
    • According to MCOL,the claim was registered as issued on 23 November so that makes it 12 December by my reckoning-I wasn't sure if you counted the 14 days from the 5th day or the day after so I went for the latest possible date.
    • nickpatel - presumably you entered into this contract with the agent off-premises if you were thinking of possibly trying to use s31 of the CCR?   If that is the case then I was under the impression (although I may well be mistaken) that the 14 day cancellation right was lost in the case of a contract for services, if the provision of those services commenced within the 14 day period, which would make whether or not you were informed of the right a moot point as it would no longer apply(?).   In any case, I'm also a bit surprised that a situation could arise where the initial "cancellation period" of a contract for services could be extended to over 12 months.  It seems a bit extreme to me that the 14 day off-premises cancellation provisions would apply here.  But I may be wrong.   I tend to agree with BankFodder that you'd be on firmer ground arguing the amount of the fee claimed (for a full year) is unfair.  But I'm not sure you could get away with arguing that you owe nothing - even though there is no tenancy agreement.  The agent seems to have done what they agreed to do, but you decided to reject the prospective tenant on the grounds that they were not "transparent"(?) because they wanted to view the property for a third time.  I'm not sure a court would find that reasonable on your part and would probably consider that the agent deserves to be paid in some respect for their work in finding that prospective tenant.   I think I'd be trying to settle on a reasonable sum rather than arguing that there was no liability at all.
  • Our picks

Leave your bag


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1525 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I went into a store in Birmingham today.

They are a relatively small store, two or three branches at most.

I won't name them at this stage.

I've been there many times and spent much money.

They are really good value.

 

 

When I entered today the security officer told me that they have a new policy whereby they take your bag (or in my case rucksack) from you and keep it until you leave.

I said "No thank you, I will keep it with me."

Their response was "Well, you'll have to let me look inside it then." I refused,

 

 

I continued to browse the store and make my purchases.

I expected to be followed but I don't think I was.

I saw other customers carrying their own bags (mainly women with large handbags).

I wondered, had they refused like me, or were they not questioned?

I completed my shopping trip and left.

 

 

My reason for posting is to ask:

Are they allowed to do this?

They had a branch in Walsall a few years ago and they did this there.

The fact that I simply refused and still went round suggests that they have no basis in law.

Please share your opinions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I felt they were saying "We don't trust you to shop in our store". So I threw back "I don't trust you to look after my property." I felt insulted. I am not sure whether I will shop there again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Only a warranted individual such as a copper etc has that authority

 

And even then, they need reasonable grounds to conduct a search. Just because they don't like the look of your bag, dress, hair style, or whatever is insufficient reason.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

Quote
No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought that was the case. Do they have to give you any reason?

 

No reason needs to be given to refuse entry or service, although politeness suggests that a reason should be given. For example, a restaurant may have a dress code that requires patrons to wear a shirt & tie or long dress/skirt.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

Quote
No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.
Link to post
Share on other sites

My nearest Toysrus have a notice which says 'we reserve the right to search all bags'. Never been too sure what 'right' they're referring to. It's only visible as you're leaving, after you've paid so they can't claim you've had the option not to shop there if you don't like their policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few shops around me that have lockers where you leave your bag and keep the key.

I suppose that they've had a large loss in the past due to shoplifting if they invested in something like that.

Don't really feel like blaming them, I would be pretty upset if I had to charge customers more to cover "disappearing" stock.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My nearest Toysrus have a notice which says 'we reserve the right to search all bags'. Never been too sure what 'right' they're referring to. It's only visible as you're leaving, after you've paid so they can't claim you've had the option not to shop there if you don't like their policy.

 

Seen this in other countries. In one store overseas, if you went into the store with bags from other stores, they used to staple the top of bags, i guess to stop people putting items in bags.

 

Tends to happen in stores where they don't have security tags on all items.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
In one store overseas, if you went into the store with bags from other stores, they used to staple the top of bags, i guess to stop people putting items in bags.

I wouldn't object to that. I do object to the Toysrus notice and there's no way I'd let them conduct a search.

Link to post
Share on other sites

presume they shout in equal sized print that they reserve the right to be sued for false imprisonment when they try and assert their other "right".

My nearest Toysrus have a notice which says 'we reserve the right to search all bags'. Never been too sure what 'right' they're referring to. It's only visible as you're leaving, after you've paid so they can't claim you've had the option not to shop there if you don't like their policy.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest roaringmouse

Shops do have the right to refuse anyone entry, but must have a basis. For example you are drunk, disorderly, they have previously seen you stealing etc. They cannot refuse you entry based on your colour for example. They can ask to look in your bag and you can refuse as you quite rightly did - even upon leaving. If they think you have stolen anything whilst in the store they can again ask you to show the contents of your bag and even pockets, and again you can (and should) refuse. They then have the right to detain you using reasonable measures and await the police arrival, HOWEVER when the police find you took nothing you then have the right to sue them for wrongful imprisonment.

 

My policy? I never give my hard earned money to someone who treats me like a thief! Shop with your feet and don't go there again. The most important person in ANY business is ME. Without me (and all the other me's) they have no business at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you dont have to give a reason to refuse admission or service in a shop but you cannot discriminate on grounds of race, disability etc. I used to help out a friend who owned a shop in Brixton and we had to ask a few people to leave over the yearsbut generally they were known to us beforehand and this just prevented an escalation of problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites
All I can say is, it's just as well you didn't grow up in Belfast in the 1970's or 80's.

You've just made me realise why I have such a strong objection to it when there's no good reason :) Never did have a problem with it in Belfast, probably because everybody was searched.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...