Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi All,   I received a CCJ approx 10 years ago for a Lloyd's student account which I failed to repay on time. At the time I recieved the CCJ papers I did not respond to the court letters and a result a judgement was granted. Ever since I recieved the CCJ I have been making repayments of £10 a month to Restons solicitors, I have on occasions made late payments but i have kept up date with any arrears, in the past when the CCJ was active I have been taken back to court by restons for late payments and additional charges have been added to the total amount as a result. The CCJ is no longer on my credit file and the balance owed is approx 2k.   In the last 3 months payments i have not made a payment to restons, i usually make payments via the restons online account where. Today I tried to login into the account and make a payment against the arrears but for some reason my login details are not recognised, I tried resetting my password where I am asked to confirm my account number with restons and date of birth but I get a account number not recognised message. I am assuming at this stage they have blocked me from making payments until I contact.   Restons have tried on a few occasions over the years to contact me to discuss completing an income and expenditure document  to date I have not engaged in any communications with them and just made my repayments.   I just wanted to get some advice, in order for me to make repayments I will need to contact restons to reinstate my online account, do I have to complete their income and expenditure document?
    • Yes they said they couldn't challenge the bank so happily reversed the premiums he did small amounts first and then reversed the whole duration of policy premiums premiums 3yrs back 
    • Hi All,   I received a CCJ approx 10 years ago for a Lloyd's student account which I failed to repay on time. At the time I recieved the CCJ papers I did not respond to the court letters and a result a judgement was granted. Ever since I recieved the CCJ I have been making repayments of £10 a month to Restons solicitors, I have on occasions made payments late but i have kept up date with any arrears, in the past when the CCJ was active I was taken back to court by restons for late payments and additional charges have been added to the total amount, the CCJ is no longer on my credit file.   The last 3 months payments i have not made to restons, i usually make payments for the online portal where I have an account registered with restons. Today I tried to make a payment against the arrears but for some reason My login details are not recognised, I tried resetting my password where I am asked to confirm my account number with restons and date of birth but I get a account not recognised message. I am assuming at this stage they have blocked me from making payments until I contact.   Restons have tried on a few occasions over the years for me to contact them and complete an income and expenditure document  to date I have not engaged in any communications with them and just made my repayments.   I just wanted to get some advice, in order for me to make repayments I will need to contact restons to reinstate my online account, do I have to complete their income and expenditure document?
    • YB "reversed" the DD's he paid using the DD Guarantee Scheme but this was done via his bank.   Why the bank allowed this for several years when the DD's were insurance premiums, I have no idea.   But then Aviva decided to come after you, the easier target, to make good their loss.
    • DSAR  Data Protection subject access request  ( SAR)   Your sibling should be investigated by the Police for their behaviour.  By acting in the way they have, they have done it deliberately to cause you harm.   I would not worry too much about the claim in 2017.  The simple fact is that you had not consented to the Insurance or your data being processed.     So reject the ombudsmans decision.  Write to Aviva telling them that you did not consent to the Insurance contract and did not consent to them processing your data.  Suggest to Aviva that they have made serious mistakes in their handling of the Insurance administration and they should write off any premiums, as no valid contract existed.     
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1526 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

Will not name the company (for now) it's the procedure I am trying to understand.

 

No outstanding amount on account (may be a variation on the amount used due to estimated readings but it

wouldn't be a lot but essentially all bills have been paid, nothing was outstanding until now.

 

Utility company write stating that they need to check the meter for safety reasons and quote 'Must Inspect' G4S are those

wanting to read the meter, however some years before a member of g4s threatened the householder at the time that if they didn't let them in they'd get a warrant and break in....this from a meter reader and before any ''must inspect' notices had been issued, meter reader dispensed, complaint made with the householder stating any further visits for meter read would need to be anyone other than G4S...

 

Fast Forward a couple of years to end of 2016, Must Inspect letters sent, but these were from G4S and were ignored (see above)

 

Utility company write stating they must be contacted within 7 days to make an appt to check the meter or action will be taken, they were contacted about 14 days later and put on notice that both the utility company and the service distribution company had been in the property just 2 months earlier due to a power outage and where the meter had been checked/ main fuse taken out, tested, put back in, sealed and the road dug up for a week (generators etc) both the distribution company and the utility company had been in and checked the meter safety etc....

 

At around the same time a letter from G4S arrives stating the householder needs to get in touch as they needed to visually check the meter, the utility company were called again (not G4S) and the same conversation again (paragraph above) and they said not to worry, they'd get it dropped etc.

 

Fast forward to this year, utility company process a bill, usual bill, standing charge and usage..10 days later the householder goes to pay the bill, but when going to notices a further charge of in excess of £50 ....there is nothing on the bill or the account to show as to why the additional price so a call was placed to the Utility company and where they stated 'oh, thats for the warrant application fee'

 

Discussion ensues, they stated they could see contact had been made (as per their and G4's requests) but that the meter still needed to be checked???? The time difference between the letter requesting contact to the time the warrant application fee was applied to the account was 75 days ...

 

G4S requested to remove the application, they state it can only come from the utility company and that as they had heard nothing the warrant application was still to go ahead.

 

Utility company contacted again, complaint raised to a different department and where they appeared to be less than helpful, householder felt somewhat threatened/intimidated (they're registered disabled both physically and mental health) utility company are aware of the status re disabled (householder is registered for priority assistance should there be a outage)

 

They refused to remove the fee, said it still applied, they could see that contact had been made when requested but that G4S needed to check the meter, they acknowledged that the property had been visited by them and the distribution company but still the meter needed to be checked as they'd tried for some time now (yes but it had been checked)

 

Utility company seemed altogether oblivious to any of the points raised re:

 

1:/Why the fee had been added when no notification as to a court date for the application had been made and that had not the householder queried the additional fee on their newest bill they would have been oblivious to the date at court to see a warrant (only 3 weeks from the time of the fee being added (so not long to go now for the householder)

 

2:/ Why the utility company acknowledged that when requested they be contacted that they were contacted which in essence nullifies their 'if you dont contact us we'll do......) and where situation explained and they appeared to have accepted it that they then reverse that acceptance.

 

3:/ Why the extra fee levied does not correspond to their online 'charges' for the same 'application'

 

4:/ Why they or agents acting on their behalf (G4S) took (a) 75 days to apply the fee and presumably make an application to the court and why they did not inform the householder when the court date was or indeed what court it was to be at?

 

5:/ Why when they can see both themselves and the distribution company have been in the property and at the meter (checked/resaled/) previous to their warrant threats that this appears not to register with them

 

---

 

The final contact from the elongated and somewhat intimidating/threatening Utility company wasa followed up by an email to the householder stating 'thanks but we're not withdrawing the warrant and that g4s would still need to attend.

...

 

Further to that, there are a couple of other points to ponder and as yet the householder has not put this to the utility company and any advice confirmation (if applicable) be given.

 

1:/ G4S as a meter reading company no longer exist, they were sold with the sale complete in January 17, so any court application and when G4S were called a few days ago and where they answered the call as G4S and spoke regarding a reference number on their letter from last year? would need to be from the American company that purchased G4S?

 

2:/ The legal requirement to inspect a meter was repealed in 2016, becoming defunct from April 1st 2016 , yet 9 months later the Utility company in their letters stated they are 'required by law to check 'your' meter every two years and where you are required to allow them access. I have read the repeal on Ofgem's site, it's quite clear. (they also state somewhere that any utility company using the 2year argument post April 2016 would be pursued

 

Calls to the Utility Company were recorded and they were informed as much, I've listened to some of them, they're dreadful listening and I as an individual could clearly hear the distress in the householders voice and also detect the undeniable intimidatory tone from the Utility company employees

 

The Householder going to court would be detrimental to their health, physically difficult, mentally pretty much impossible but court they will go, better to be avoided but when the above is the situation any homeonwer/tenant would want to protect their home from what is pretty much unlawful entry.

 

Deb

 

Any thoughts ? views? re the Must Inspect repeal?

I reside in Dawlish Warren but am not a rabbit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason for lack of response, is the length of your post. Very informative, but a story that many would not read.

 

It appears the resident of the property is suspected of tampering with the meter. Utility companies who own the meters have a legal right to access the meter and to use agents to do this, in this case G4S. G4S might have changed ownership, but the warrant would still apply.

 

When they apply for a warrant, a date to attend a court is given and it should be their local court. If they don't attend, the warrant will be obtained and entry will be forced if necessary to inspect the meter.

 

I suspect Magistrates will be told that there is belief tampering is taking place and the homeowner is being obstructive.

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

I should have condensed but tried to leave nothing left out.

,

I don't believe they suspect meter tampering, both the utility company and the distribution company were in the property some weeks before he threat of a warrant and were both at the meter in the early hours and the following day due to a power outage in the road.

 

It's not the court process thats the problem, what is more of an issue is the procedure on how they're getting there.

 

They quote the '2 years by law, must inspect' as the reason for wanting access and yet ofgem repealed that in April 2016 stating that there are other guidelines and methods of gaining access available to the utility companies (quote consumer protection as one reason

for repealing it)

 

So can a utility company progress a warrant (notwithstanding other stupidity from them) on a law that no longer exists?

I reside in Dawlish Warren but am not a rabbit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See this link to another thread discussing different law used for warrants to gain access.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?474139-Warrant-of-entry

 

If there is no issue of billing arrears or actual meter readings having not been made for an excessive period, then you would question the actions. Is it a safety issue ? Tampering ?

 

On the warrant application, they would normally state a reason so Magistrates know why a warrant is being requested.

 

My only experience of this type of issue, is an energy supplier wanting to change the gas meter. Even though it is on an external wall, they needed to access the house to check on gas appliances for safety reasons. I guess that had i not agreed to allow access, they would have applied for a warrant.

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

IF they change the meter,

even an outside one,

they have to access the property to switch off pilot lights etc and then bleed the air out of the system, usually by putting the burner on a hob on.

 

The utility co can apply for a warrant of entry for safety reasons and that doesnt have to be just inspecting the meter.

 

Now, it begs the question,

why wasnt it possible to arrange for the gas co to look at the meter at a mutually convenient time.

 

That is what they wanted to do at the outset so why the stand off?

 

I am not convinced a magistrate would refuse access so better to wind the clock back if possible.

 

The warrant wont have been granted yet so they cant bill for it until successful so that is another matter to deal with when this is over.

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...