Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • be very wary upon what you see being recently posted on here 😎 regarding KIH.... all is not what it seems...  
    • 1st - all my posts on CAG are made not only in reply to the specific issue the topic starter makes but also in a general matter to advise any future readers upon the related subject - here it is kings interhigh online school. KIH lets take this topic apart shall we so readers know the real situation and the real truth...and underline the correct way to deal with KIH. https://tinyurl.com/ycxb4fk7 Kings Interhigh Online School issues - Training and Apprenticeships - Consumer Action Group - but did not ever reply to the last post.  but the user then went around every existing topic here on CAG about KIH pointing to the above topic and the 'want' to make some form of group  promoting some  'class action' against KIH . then on the 2nd march this very topic this msg is in was created. all remarkably similar eh? all appear to be or state..they are in spain... ....as well as the earlier post flaunting their linkedin ID, (same profile picture) that might have slipped through via email before our admin killed it.., trying to give some kind of legitimacy to their 'credentials' of being 'an honest poster'....oh and some kind of 'zen' website using a .co.uk  address (when in spain- bit like the Chinese ebay sallers) they run ... and now we get the father of the bride ...no sorry...father of a child at the uk-based international school in question posting ...pretending to be not the 'other alf... do you really think people are that stupid..... ................... nope you never owed that in the 1st place... wake up you got had and grabbed the phone - oh no they are taking me to court under UK jurisdiction...and fell for every trick in the book that they would never ever put in writing that could be placed in front of a court operating under their stated uk jurisdiction wherever you live. T&C's are always challengeable under UK law this very site would not exist if it were not for the +£Bn's bank charges reclaiming from 2006> and latterly the +£Bn's of PPI reclaiming both directly stated in the banks' T&C's were they claimed they were legally enforceable ...not!! they lost big time... why? a waste of more money if you've not got a court claim....... why not use them for a good outcome...go reclaim that £1000 refundable deposit you got scammed out of . people please research very carefully ...you never know who any of these people are that are posting about kings interhigh and their 'stories' they could even be one of their online tutors or a shill . don't get taken in. dx      
    • @KingsParent thank you for sharing your experience.  I also tried contacting the CEO but didn’t get very far. Do you mind sharing his contact details?  kind regards   
    • Thank you Rocky for the clarifications though they did cause a problem at first since an original windsccreen ticket was  of a different breach some time before. The current windscreen ticket only states that you were parked there for 6 minutes which is just one minute over the minimum time allowed as the Consideration period. There is no further proof that you parked there for any longer than that is there? More photographs for example? Moving on to the Notice to Keeper-it does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. First there is no parking period mentioned on it. there is the time 20.25 stated which coincides with the W/S ticket but a parking period must have a starting and finishing time-just one time is insufficient to qualify as a parking  period as required in Section 9 [2] [a] . Are there any different photos shown on the NTK comapared to the w/s PCN? Not that that would make a difference as far as PoFA goes since the times required by PoFA should be on the NTK but at the moment Met only appear to show that you stayed there for 6 minutes. Another failure to comply with PoFA is at S9([2][e] where their wording should be "the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; ". You can see on your NTK that they misssed off the words in brackets. Met cannot therefore transfer the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable. Then their is the discrepancy with the post code on the NTK  HA4 0EY which differs from the post code on the contract and the Post Office Postcode Finder which both list it as HA4 0FY. As you were not parked in HA4 0EY the breach did not occur. In the same way as if you were caught speeding in the Mall in London, yet you were charged with speeding in Pall mall London [a street nearby] you would be found not guilty since though you were speeding you were not speeding in Pall Mall. I bow to Eric's brother on his reasoning on post 12 re the electric bay abuse  That wording is not listed on their signs nor is there any mention on the contract of any electric charging points at all let alone who can park there or use them. He is quite right too that the entrance sign is merely an invitaion to treat it cannot form a contrct with motorists. Also the contract looks extremely  short no doubt there will be more when we see the full Witness statement. As it stands there is no confirmation from Standard Life [or Lift !] on the contract that Savills are able to act on their behalf. Also most contracts are signed at the end of the contract to prevent either side adding extra points. So their percentage  chance of winning their case would be somewhere between 0.01 and 0.02.    
    • Owners of older vehicles tell the BBC of their anger that their cars' apps will stop working.View the full article
  • 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
      • 160 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

1st/Moony PAP Letter of Claim - old BOS OD - now intrum/resolvecall


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 102 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

Hello everyone

 

I've received a letter from Moon Beever Solicitors on behalf of 1st Credit (Finance) Limited for an outstanding Halifax debt of £2,254.03

 

Letter reads as follows

 

"We are instructed on behalf of 1st Credit (Finance) Limited of The Omnibus Building, Lesbourne Road, Reigate, RH2 7JP.

This letter is sent in compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol on Debt Claims ("the Protocol").

It is part of the requirements of the Protocol that we refer you to Annex 1 of the same and supply you with an information sheet and reply form. A copy of Annex 1 and those documents are provided with this letter.

 

Our client has a claim for monies owed on your Bank Of Scotland Plc Bank account reference xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, which was opened on or around 3rd July 2006 ("the Agreement").

 

The account was assigned to our client on 18th November 2013 and a notice of assignment was sent to you on 10th August 2015 confirming our client as the new legal owner.

 

The sums owed to Bank Of Scotland Plc must now be paid to our client"

 

It then goes on to say that I can request a written copy of the agreement (if applicable) which the client will request from the original creditor and send to me upon receipt.

As well as providing as reply form and a income/outgoing form

 

I had some bad credit problems in the past and I understood that they were now statute barred.

This debt doesn't appear on my credit report, which I check every month after being a victim of identity theft.

 

I'm not sure what to do next, so any advice will be gratefully received.

 

Thanks,

 

Al

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you paid or acknowledged the Debt within the last six years.

 

If you have not paid or ack the debt it is Statute Barred which means the debt is still there but they cannot take court action to recover debt.

 

They can ask you pay but they cannot harrass you when you have advised them it is SB.

 

Some of the more knowledgeable members will you advise you

Link to post
Share on other sites

if its after 6 years since the default date with no payments/ack's - happy days.

is it re a credit card?

(ps, i know it shouldn't go from the def date, but as has been seen some creds do argue that. and its been in issue in the courts recently apparently)

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, things may be different re a current a/c, depending on its circumstances.

did they default it. (seems so, in which case the same wld apply. over 6 years since, happy days)

wait see what the guys input also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the number is not 16 digits its not a card

have you moved since taking this OD out

and are HBOS aware of your current adddress

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

then you MUST reply oneway or the other

else by default you'll get a backdoor CCJ filed to an old address

that's what the phishing letters are about that you've probably had already.

 

HBOS has 24/7 phonebanking

go ring them now and ask last payment date.

 

you really should never run away from debts in the current climate

its getting even easier for debt buyers to get backdoor CCJ's on mostly any consumer debt now.

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

just got off the phone with HBOS and according to their records the following are linked to me;

 

A card cash account which had a balance added to it of £50.93 on 25/6/2015 (I thought this had been closed a long time ago, so this is a bonus)

 

A current account (which the letter from 1st Credit/Moon Beever is referring to) which according to HBOS was closed on 17/09/2011.

 

The person I spoke to couldn't see any notes about it being assigned to a debt collection agency,

i'm not sure where 1st credit have got the date 18/11/2013 as assignment to them from HBOS.

There was also no notes about the balance at point of closure or a last payment date.

 

They couldn't send me out any information,

I need to speak to Account Services in the morning and they will be able to send me out the information.

 

Where do I go from here?

 

Are 1st credt/Moon just phising on a old SB debt,

hoping that i'll get scared and pay up?

Link to post
Share on other sites

its rare for a DCA to go straight in with a PAP letter

have you never received nowt else on this before now?

its statute barred then regardless.

forget the pap forms

send them our SB letter from the debt collection section of our library

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

they can still go for a backdoor CCJ regardless to if its SB

as nothing is ever checked no human is ever involved in a default judgement it rubberstamped.

which is why its vitally important to always tell your creditors of an address change.

 

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

its the only one there bar the Scottish one!

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 owner

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

i've just got off the phone with HBOS account services who then put me through their collections department 

who confirmed to me that the account in question was closed by them in 2010 and not 2011.

there was a payment made to it on 25/06/2012 (not sure who that was from, it wasn't from me).

They then confirmed that they sold the debt to 1st credit in November 2013.

As I've never acknowledged the debt or made a payment myself

should I send the SB letter or because there was a payment made in 2012 is debt still in force?

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the payment wasn't made by you

then its not authorised by you in writing and doesn't count.

 

didn't have any debt management plans with anyone did you?

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...