Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi All   After a bit of advice to see where I stand. Bought a car in Sept 2022 on pcp. Been told it had a big inspection and was good to go. Had many issues with it throughout the year including trims coming off the car and sunroof not closing.   While getting the sunroof repaired at month 12, in Sept 2023, the bodyshop guy said your cars been in a bad accident. Garage said it hasn't but offered to take the car back at half of what I paid for it as long as I buy a replacement from them before inspecting it (probably damage control) (car was £78k, said they'd offer £40k "trade in value" as if doing me a favour).   Ended up getting a forensic inspection done for £2400 in Dec 2023, confirmed car was in a bad smash (write off level but unrecorded on hpi) and potentially unsafe to drive - front end is slightly bent towards 1 side, what looks like a hairline crack on the chasis, overspray, bonner with patches of filler all over it, damaged rubbers etc   Raised complaint to finance company and few weeks ago to FOS... just wondering what people's experiences have been like going through the FOS, main thing that concerns me is that it was 12-13 months after I bought the car that I realised what caused these issues and raised the issue to the garage/ finance co but the damage/ misaligned panels are actually visible in the advert photos which I saved thankfully.    Dealership has had my car for 4 weeks to let a few bodyshops look at it (without giving me a courtesy car!!!) Not giving me any updates either because I went to the FOS about it and didnt want to speak to them over the phone anymore as opposed to emails. Note: hanging trim was reported within 3 months but due to part delays it didn't come until like July 2023, within 2 months the piece came off again, claimed under repairers warranty for another replacement 6 weeks ago and within 2 weeks this time the trim is coming off AGAIN (assuming it won't stay on due to the car being actually bent out of shape slightly)   Any idea if I have a good case or if there's anything else I can do?   Thanks
    • After the dealer failed to refund the money I checked the sort code and account number to reveal which bank received the money. It turned out to be HSBC BUSINESS DIRECT ONLINE. I called them and they confirmed the account name wasn’t Langley Cars though obviously didn’t tell me the correct account name. My bank contacted HSBC after I reported this to be fraud and they did in fact do a charge back but reversed the decision when the dealer sent a copy of the receipt he gave me for the deposit where it said it was non-refundable. I said that doesn’t mean anything when the car should never have been put on the forecourt when it was a death trap, and not fit for purpose.   The MOT revealed only a few of the faults which he agreed to correct in a week as I needed the car to travel out of London for work. He didn’t meet that deadline either because there were other more serious problems as identified by my independent car check. The same mechanic informed the dealer of these faults. The car wasn’t fixed by the agreed date due to the extensive repairs needed. So he was in breach of our contract on many levels.    I requested the bank find out the correct name of the account and they said the only information they had was like you said was the account number and sort code. I challenged the bank stating that whenever I create a new payee if the name doesn’t match the registered account name, it declines the creation of the proposed payee. So what happened in this instance?    I checked company’s house using the address from where the dealership is located and there was neither the two names, one was aa advertised in AUTOTRADER and the other on the courtyards entrance. I thought as I had made payment to the dealers ‘Trading as’ name that it would more than likely be enforceable than any other. Indeed the Bailiff was the one to call me and say that a variation of the warrant of control needed to be done before he could go and enforce the order. I cross-checked the address on Companies House website and got 3 different business names. Only one appears to be car related.  I am unsure as to what I can do within the variation of the warrant which the bailiff felt was appropriate. I will speak to him again Monday. 
    • Their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. iit was not posted until 13 days after the event for one thing meaning it would be deemed to arrive on the 15th day instead of the 14th day. Now though we cannot expect that your PCN also missed the deadline there were still two other things wrong with the wording of the PCN that if your PCN has the same wording as your friends means that your PCN would not be compliant either. Their PCN does not specify the period of parking as required n the Act. It does show the ANPR arrival and departure dates but as those times include driving from the entrance to finding a parking place then later driving from the parking place to the exit cannot be described as a parking period. I suspect that the " Important Note" on your form will also not comply though I cannot be sure until we see your actual PCN.The reason I can't confirm that is because they sent out the PCN too late they have said that they are pursuing your friend on the assumption that they were the driver as well as the keeper-something that Courts do not accept. But it does look as if your PCN is not compliant which means that the keeper cannot be held liable to pay the charge. Only the driver can be made to pay it. If you have not appealed and revealed who was driving, there is no way that  Excel know who was driving.  So just to be sure please send them an SAR . On another topic do you have any proof that you did not stay there for so long just to really spoil Excel's day.
    • As your first PCN was a Notice to Driver which would have been followed by a Notice to keeper over a month later [even though it may only state Parking Charge notice] it is even more necessary to send PE an SAR. If either document fails to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act  2012 Schedule 4 then both you and your father are in the clear. So you do not need to worry about is any paperwork from unregulated debt collectors and fifth rate solicitors. The only thing to look out for is a Letter of Claim and all you have to do is respond with a snotty letter back to them .  
  • 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

HPH/cohen PAP letter of claim - ex Barclaycard [EX-EGG Card] debt with different account number


amerillo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2027 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,

 

I sent out a CCA request to DLC, who were collecting for an old Egg debt;

I have been paying £1 token payments to them every since the account defaulted over 6 years ago,

and due to having moved house a couple of times since, have completely lost track of what has happened with this as the standing orders were set up to come out automatically.

 

Last week I received a response to my request from DLC stating

"we returned the account to Egg in July 2010, who have since ceased to trade. We assume that your account has been acquired by a third party company and we suggest you contact them".

 

I have no idea who to contact about this now! Any advise as to what I should do next?

 

If Egg have ceased to trade, then where has my £1 a month been going?!!

 

Many thanks

AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

stop paying!!

 

 

look on your credit file

does it show?

that will tell you the owner now

 

 

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

  • 1 year later...

Hi all,

 

A while ago I posted this thread in case you wanted to see the history:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?458839-Low-income-6-year-old-debts-and-worrying-about-the-possibility-of-future-court-action&p=4854697#post4854697

 

Since then, I have sent out CCA requests etc. and mostly everything has gone quiet, although Halifax have continued to send the odd letter through Moorcrofts.

 

I received an interesting one:

A letter from Barclaycard saying that a company called HPH Ltd now have been assigned my debt; I'm guessing they bought it from them.

Then yesterday, I received a letter from HPH saying that they had instructed Robinson Way to collect the debt (as I understand it, HPH own RW?).

 

what I was initially a little confused about was the fact that I have never defaulted on a Barclaycard.

But it would seem that this is something to do with Egg as they ceased trading and Barclays acquired them. T

 

 

he strange thing about all this is that the 16-digit card number that they are referencing as the defaulted account means nothing to me,

it is completely different to the Egg card account number that I defaulted on!

Also, the amounts are a couple hundred ££ different too,

so I am making this assumption purely from process of elimination!!

 

DLC were the original DCA that I was paying £1/mth to in respect of my defaulted Egg card until 2016 when I CCAd them.

I posted their response on here when I received it, which is also relevant to this discussion (it's only 2 posts long!):

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?460425-DLC-response-to-CCA-request-for-old-Egg-card-debt&p=4865474#post4865474

 

it seems that I was paying £1/mth to DLC for nothing as they passed the account back to Egg in 2010!

And I have had no communication from Egg/Barclays until now.

 

 

I am a little confused by what has happened.

If DLC passed the account back so long ago and I was paying them,

then surely I hadn't been making any payments to Egg/Barclays, and maybe it is statute barred?

 

 

Maybe they have mixed up some accounts somewhere and that is why I don't recognise the account number? Really not sure where I stand!

 

This particular letter has mentioned solicitors and courts, so just wondering how I should approach this?

 

Any advice much appreciated! Thanks again!

AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

send robbersway a CCA request

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

the one in the poc

is it 16 digits?

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

no I wouldnt worry that can be dealt with the later if necessary

just CCA using that number as it what the claimant is litigating you on:wink:

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

  • 2 weeks later...

OK,

 

CCA sent last week. I received a letter back today saying that they have requested a copy of the agreement/statement and have put my account temporarily on hold. Apparently they will contact me when they receive the documentation.

 

So, i guess the statutory time frame still applies, although as I am not paying anyone, this is perhaps irrelevant, am I right? At what point can I assume that they do not have the correct documentation? Should I chase them up after the statutory time?

 

Also, I'm wondering whether it is worth the £10 to SAR BarclayCard as the original owner (after acquiring Egg) in order to determine what has happened on the account since DLC apparently returned it to them. If no payments had been filtered back to them and DLC were just cash-cowing me then surely it would be SB and I would have no use for a CCA?

 

Thanks

AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

See if a proper reply comes back from the CCA Request.

 

When did you first default on the a/c ?

 

Are you aware of any default charges made back when the a/c first defaulted.

 

:-)

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

still waiting for a CCA to come back from HPH/RW.

Took you guys advice and thought I'd wait rather than wasting £10 on a SAR if I don't need to.

 

To answer your question slick132,

it defaulted back in the summer of 2009 and I'm not sure of any default charges as all I have from Egg is the default letter itself.

 

 

Were you hinting at claiming these charges back?

 

Thanks

AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Amerillo,

 

Reclaiming charges from BC continues to be an option, including compound interest.

 

However, I get the impression the a/c became delinquent and went to collections quickly, hence you suffered few default charges back then.

 

If this is the case, reclaiming such default charges is probably not worth the trouble.

 

Let us know about the CCA response.

 

:-)

Edited by slick132
"became"

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,

I agree with you about it not being worth the hassle.

 

Still no response from either party and it's been a few weeks now. I'll continue to wait,

 

I'm guessing they will not get back to me to let me know if they do not have it??

It feels like I'm in limbo a bit.

 

Perhaps the only indication that I will get that they do not have the correct documentation is when I receive a letter to say that the account has been sold to another firm!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They probably WILL respond when they're ready - you need do nothing until they DO.

 

:-)

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

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Hi all,

 

And the saga continues with RW chasing this old Egg card account on behalf of HPH Ltd (Ex Barclaycard).

 

If you see in post #9 of this thread, a CCA was sent to them nearly 9 months ago, to which they responded that they had requested the documentation and have put my account on hold until they receive the paperwork; needless to say, I'm still waiting for said paperwork!

 

Now today I receive a letter from RW telling me that my account has been assessed as meeting the criteria for legal action! I've attached the wording to this post.

 

Should I write back to them informing them of the fact that I am still waiting for the CCA and that my account should be on hold? Or just ignore?

 

Once again, many thanks for your help!

AM

RW letter.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

begging letter ignore

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

Ah thought so! Thanks!

 

As much as i suspected this, the moment the word "legal" was mentioned, it alerted me! I guess that's the whole psychology behind it all!

 

Thanks

AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

doesn't say WILL anywhere read it properly.......

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

  • 4 weeks later...

Ok, so it seems they weren't bluffing!

 

Just received a letter from Howard Cohen and Co. entitled "Letter of Claim". Accompanying this was an income and expenditure breakdown form for me to fill in, and a set of papers with various tick boxes on it, giving me the option to agree to owing the debt, or dispute it and request various documentation.

I have attached the main letter and an example of the tick box papers for reference.

 

I have noticed that again, the word "could" is used throughout the letter when they have referred to court action, however, I'm still not sure where I stand.

 

I guess it's time to respond to them?

As per the posts above, RW still owe me a CCA, and after the lengthy silence after I requested it, I assumed they didn't have it.

However, I'm starting to think they maybe they do, given that they seem to know the exact date that the agreement was entered in to (I have no record of this date, so not sure if it is accurate).

 

That being said, there is still the issue of their account number not tallying up with the account number that I have on record and that all previous communication has been in relation to (as per post #3). There is also the issue that it would seem as though I had been paying DLC my £1 for years, and that this would not have gone towards the account, so COULD be statute barred (as per post #1)??

 

What has happened to this account over the years is unknown to me and so I'm unsure as to where to go from here......any help much appreciated!

 

Once again, thanks!

AM

Letter of claim scan.jpg

Example of tick box forms sent.jpg

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

go read this and follow post 6.

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?481827-The-Pre-Action-Protocol-for-Debt-Claims-is-made-by-the-Master-of-the-Rolls-as-Head-of-Civil-Justice.-1st-Oct-2017(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

doesn't mean its going anywhere

its just the new protocol they MUST abide by if they are thinking of court

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

thread titled updated

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

Awesome, thanks! Will get onto that sharpish!

 

Might be being stupid but I can't seem to find the attached form to download in post #6 of that thread......will post there also as it may be more appropriate.

 

Thanks

AM

Link to post
Share on other sites

its back there now

 

no please don't post on that thread

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...