Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi All Just an update that the case was heard today and thankfully the case was dismissed. As many had told me, DCB legal sent an advocate who like myself was also there 30 mins beforehand. He wanted to double check a few things with me beforehand that I had put in my witness statement and then told me that he agrees that my lease forms the supremacy of contract and that he will let the judge also know this once we enter.  He stuck to his word and led with this and the judge asked if I had anything to add and I just reiterated the supremacy of contract points from my witness statement. The judge then dismissed the case and the whole thing was over in 10 mins. I just want to end by thanking everyone that has helped. I owe more than thanks and this forum and the main contributers are incredible. I will make a donation once I have secured a new role which is my main focus at the moment. Not having to find nearly £600 to pay for this claim is also a massive relief.    Thank you all. 
    • you are not stating there is not one.......... the DN line is part of our std holding/no paperwork defence. No DN is fatal to any claim. its always important to bring it up where the claimants claim involves the consumer credit act.
    • And Mr Schnur has responded to my email reply to Natalie:   Good Afternoon ****,  Thank you very much for your email regarding the above mentioned shipment. I am very sorry for the inconvenience experienced with your order. Please note that we will not be able to increase the compensation as suggested by yourself as you have not taken out any protection to fully cover your parcel's true value. We are currently in the process to liaise with the courier to see whether they can conduct some depot and lost property searches for you. We will get back to you as soon we have heard back.  Kindest Regards David Schnur
    • if the magistrate added anything else, bar the victim surcharge which is a std 'fee' everyone pays, then you have been fined as well. if a magistrate imposes a separate fine in addition to the above then that is a criminal penalty, and thus is recorded on your record. sorry but there you go. i did warn you last month it would be a miracle if you didnt get a criminal record. dx  
  • 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

MMF again - useless vague threatogram


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2419 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

Have received a letter from MMF addressing me by my former surname (renounced in 2009).

 

"We write further to our previous communications [blah blah] yet to receive a reply. If you have more than one account with us, you will find the breakdown enclosed."

 

I have received no previous communications regarding the customer reference number given, there is no breakdown of the alleged debt, nor even a hint as to who the original creditor might be. The "balance" (£350.00) is also suspiciously nice and neat.

 

I've dealt with these muppets before when they re-defaulted me for a fictitious Cash Genie default. Could do with cutting to the chase with them to avoid similar hassles.

247 Moneybox - balance written off, default removed

Cash Genie - bogus default removed

Peachy - interest refunded, default removed

1 Month Loan - interest refunded, data removed

Peachy - balance written off, default removed

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

A bit of digging has revealed it's a (mis-sold) Wonga loan originally due to be repaid on 15/03/2010 (i.e. statute barred). :roll:

 

It was defaulted by Gothia on 11/09/2010 and has therefore since dropped off my credit report. Doesn't stop MMF though! :-x

247 Moneybox - balance written off, default removed

Cash Genie - bogus default removed

Peachy - interest refunded, default removed

1 Month Loan - interest refunded, data removed

Peachy - balance written off, default removed

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...