Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • 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

Are Court Enforcement Services Ltd fees legal, or not? business EON debt/CCJ


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2526 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

Yes. I owe EON the money for electricity. By way of background I have owed EON £4000 in the past and noone turned up in a stab proof vest in my kitchen unannounced.

 

ploddertom said:
It could be the NoE was sent to the same address as all the original CCJ docs. As I have said previously if you decide to go the chargeback route then you then see how quick they will then act. As you have business premises they are allowed to force entry and if there is anything there they will remove immediately, if insufficient they then have the right to obtain a Warrant to force entry to your residential premises - for those that say NO to this then I am sorry but it does happen. The fees will then rise again substantially.

 

At present you have no threat of any further action so why rock the boat. All further action relies on what can happen through the County Court.

 

I am more than willing to rock the boat if two men pretending to be officers of the law have stolen money from me. IMO that is a serious crime! Am I wrong to think so?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

they are not imposters.

 

 

old and new threads merged

please everyone behave appropriately toward each other.

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

Surely you mean that a notice of enforcement was not received? You must contact the bailiffs and ask if a notice was sent and if so, to what address and the date of the notice. Also ask for a copy to be sent out with the fee breakdown. There needs to be around at least 10 days between the date of the notice and the visit. The bailiff is also required to keep a record of the time that the notice was sent (posted).

 

 

You have gone from the bailiff "dressed in the manner of a policeman" to "impersonating" a policeman. I think you ought to check what impersonating a policeman actually entails. It is a lot more than dressing in similar clothing.

 

Errrr. Impersonating a policeman can be as little as verbal identification AFAIK?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The NOE must be sent to where the debtor normally lives or trades from. If an address different to these is used then enforcement is not compliant.

 

The EA doesn't have to carry the warrant or writ, but must show on request his authority to enter. He can arrange for the warrant or writ to be viewed.

 

HMRC have clarified that if the creditor is registered for VAT then the creditor bears the cost of this and recovers it from HMRC. In this case, VAT should not have been collected from the debtor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that a NOE was not sent as it was not me collected the post last week when it would have arrived, it was my Mother. Im sure the old girl wouldve mentioned it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Errrr. Impersonating a policeman can be as little as verbal identification AFAIK?

 

Police Act 1996:

 

S.90

 

(2) Any person who, not being a constable, wears any article of police uniform in circumstances where it gives him an appearance so nearly resembling that of a member of a police force as to be calculated to deceive shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

 

(4)In this section— (a) “article of police uniform” means any article of uniform or any distinctive badge or mark or document of identification usually issued to members of police forces or special constables, or anything having the appearance of such an article, badge, mark or document,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Police Act 1996:

 

S.90

 

(2) Any person who, not being a constable, wears any article of police uniform in circumstances where it gives him an appearance so nearly resembling that of a member of a police force as to be calculated to deceive shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

 

(4)In this section— (a) “article of police uniform” means any article of uniform or any distinctive badge or mark or document of identification usually issued to members of police forces or special constables, or anything having the appearance of such an article, badge, mark or document,

 

Seems reasonable. However this is tangential to the matter. If the fees I have been charged are deliberately inflated then I have been stolen from, whether the perpetrator wore a police outfit or a burqa. right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 Things to do in the morning:

1 - ask E.ON what address they sent all Court docs to and which Court they used

2 - contact the Court and also ask what address inc Postcode they sent everything to

 

Not being funny but it won't be the first time one here that someone else in the family has intercepted the post. You have to stop being fixated by what has happened so far, you must try & address the issue of the unknown CCJ.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems reasonable. However this is tangential to the matter. If the fees I have been charged are deliberately inflated then I have been stolen from, whether the perpetrator wore a police outfit or a burqa. right?

 

Yes, they have overcharged you, in my opinion this was knowingly. They are not 'wet behind the ears', they deal with enforcement every day and know full well what they can and cannot charge.

 

As you didn't receive the court forms, you could apply for a set-aside; however as you have said that if you were aware of the proceedings you would've paid the balance. The judge is going to rightly ask why you didn't pay the debt before Eon started proceedings - you admit you owe the debt so why not pay it when it was due? I'm only saying what the judge will think.

 

I wouldn't deal with the bailiff - go direct to the creditor as they remeain liable for the bailiff's actions. Explain what they have overcharged and why, and tell them you expect a swift resolution. I would argue that only the compliance stage fee is owed, and anything else needs to be refunded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You must think carefully here. I understand that you are angry but if you allow me my input from a neutral perspective, it will be as follows:

The 2 bailiffs were not impersonating police officers. They have not stolen money off you, at worst, they have abused the fee schedule and at best, they are just unaware of what should have been charged.

 

 

If you decide to go for a set aside, you must be aware that there is a cost to make the application and if you lose, you will be expected to pay the other sides costs. If you go for a set aside, enforcement will be suspended, pending the outcome so the reversal of funds is not a risk. If you do a reversal without the set aside, Ploddertom is correct that they will return swiftly.

 

 

If you want to challenge the fee without the set aside, this will have to be by way of detailed assessment. Again there is a risk of costs if you lose.

 

With respect "abused the fees schedule" is a sop. In any other case that would be called theft!

 

Given the two option you outline whats the easiest way to proceed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 Things to do in the morning:

1 - ask E.ON what address they sent all Court docs to and which Court they used

2 - contact the Court and also ask what address inc Postcode they sent everything to

 

Not being funny but it won't be the first time one here that someone else in the family has intercepted the post. You have to stop being fixated by what has happened so far, you must try & address the issue of the unknown CCJ.

 

Having been in a similar position to the OP all I can add is that...Ploddertom is right with his analysis......the whole scenario hinges on getting to the bottom of the address the Court docs were sent to. Only then can the OP unravel the rest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitely said:
Yes, they have overcharged you, in my opinion this was knowingly. They are not 'wet behind the ears', they deal with enforcement every day and know full well what they can and cannot charge.

 

As you didn't receive the court forms, you could apply for a set-aside; however as you have said that if you were aware of the proceedings you would've paid the balance. The judge is going to rightly ask why you didn't pay the debt before Eon started proceedings - you admit you owe the debt so why not pay it when it was due? I'm only saying what the judge will think.

 

I wouldn't deal with the bailiff - go direct to the creditor as they remeain liable for the bailiff's actions. Explain what they have overcharged and why, and tell them you expect a swift resolution. I would argue that only the compliance stage fee is owed, and anything else needs to be refunded.

 

I didnt pay because I didnt have any money (unfortunately). And now I dont have any money once more.

 

wonkeydonkey said:
Having been in a similar position to the OP all I can add is that...Ploddertom is right with his analysis......the whole scenario hinges on getting to the bottom of the address the Court docs were sent to. Only then can the OP unravel the rest.

 

I will contact EON again tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes do that

I wouldn't be going down the sabre rattling route till you know ALL the info

 

 

time to leave things there now gentleman

no need to keep repeating yourselves else the thread will be closed again till the op asks the siteteam to re open..

 

 

you have been warned on flamewars before behave for the sake of the OP of this thread

 

 

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

To clarify:

 

A notice of enforcement was not sent. hence I could not have received one.

 

I think the structure of the fees is as you say. However I feel that the notice of enforcement may have deliberatley not been sent in order that higher fees could be charged.

 

I cant believe that you "cant see a major problem" with impersonating an officer in order to steal £600?!?! I imagine that could attract a custodial sentence?

 

I did not receive a claim pack, btw.

 

As I said yesterday, 'set aside' applications are difficult to get accepted. The hurdle that you will have to jump is the courts criteria that you need to have a defence to the original claim. A claim by you that you had not received a claim pack will not be a good enough defence. So far, you have stated that the amount owed was not in dispute but that you could not afford to pay the amount. Suffice to say, my opinion is that such an application is doomed to fail.

 

Also 'set aside' applications are not free. The court fee alone is £255.

 

You have made some disturbing statements. One being that the enforcement agency had deliberately not sent a statutory Notice of Enforcement. As I also said yesterday, you will fail on this point straight away as to NoE is deemed as served under the Interpretation Act unless the contrary can be proved. I cannot see how you can prove that it was not sent.

 

The last comment that the enforcement agent was 'impersonating a police officer in order to steal £600' is also doomed to fail. A very serious complaint was made a few years ago regarding a bailiff dressed to 'impersonate' a police officer and the complaint was thoroughly investigated by both the Lord Chancellor and the IPCC. The complaint was rejected.

 

As I see it, your only valid argument possibly concerns the amount of fees charged. In this respect, the correct procedure is for you to apply for detailed assessment of the fees. Such an application is expensive (a court fee of almost £300). Also, you will need to prepare your case very carefully as there is no evidence of any successful claims made by debtors to these applications.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition, as said earlier enforcement is not suspended until the outcome of a hearing on a set-aside application. Set aside applications can take months to progress to a hearing. Until the set aside order is made the judgment stands.

 

Nothing to stop the debtor making an additional claim to the HCEO to stay enforcement, however.

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 Bailiff Advice

 

 

I have a question here (and this is for my own benefit as much as anyone else's). If you had bailiffs at your door for a £2,000 judgement debt that you knew nothing about, had never received a letter before claim, response pack or any notification whatsoever, would you just pay the £2,000 (and additional bailiff fees, execution costs and interest) because there was nothing that you could do, or would you expect to be afforded the right to challenge the judgement on the grounds that you had no prior warning of action?

 

 

Of course if successful in any subsequent court action, the applicant would be refunded all court fees paid out. Regarding a detailed assessment, is there any figures or evidence anywhere of failed claims by debtors?

 

 

What this case highlights is that once fees have been taken by bailiffs, it is extremely difficult and indeed risky to attempt to obtain refunds. To me, it seems a very uneven playing field.

 

This is a multi situation question which is best suited to the Discussion area of this Forum as there is no simple answer.

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

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You might not be able to. I would not pay, particularly if an enforcement officer shows no paperwork. I would call the Police. If there was no property relating to the business at the OP's house, then there was nothing to take.

 

I suspect all the court papers and notice of enforcement went to the business address. Then when there was no response, a different address was found.

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

Sometimes there is not a simple yes or no answer.

 

Are you saying that a bailiff should withdraw every time a debtor claims he has not heard of the debt? Yes or no.

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 Guys,

 

An interesting development has occurred. I've just spoken to EON and the debt I've paid WASNT EVEN MINE!! It was a final payment up to July 2016. My company has only occupied the property from June 2016 though!

Link to post
Share on other sites

What warrant? I aint seen no warrant.

 

Seriously though; I've tried to phone the bailiffs company today; no answer of course.

 

The EON representative insists their bailiffs have "done nothing wrong".

Edited by dx100uk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have any connection with the business that owed EON this money ?

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 the debt is not yours EON will probably stonewall, and you might have to take them to court.

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2526 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...