Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • we dont get N157 because its new OCMC but no court dont have evidence either.   Just seems a bit of a pointless wait but oh well
    • Post #9 suggested some options to avoid or put off having a smart meter. Post #12 a simple solution to your complaint about the ay they handle fixed monthly DD. It's not really clear why you posted if you're going get irate when members "jump in" with suggestions. You can see what I'm referring to on "gasracker.uk" to allay your suspicion that I was lying in Post #16 which was made to correct ther misinformation shown in your Post #15
    • Back to octopus from the smart meter/tariff salesperson. Octopus have now said just ignore the letter - I dont have to have one despite there letter implying (at least) it was required, but that i will HAVE to have a smart meter if current meters stop working as 'their suppliers dont supply non smart meters any more'. They also say they do not/will not disable any smart functionality when they fit a smart meter I am of course going to challenge that. Thats their choice of meter fitter/supplier problem not mine
    • Point taken that we should inform new Caggers that the £20 option is there in wrong registration cases.  Well, supposedly there, who knows what the PPCs would do in practice.  Anyway, the option is allegedly there with both the BPA as you say, but also the IPC (I've just checked). However, there's a danger here of baby, bathwater. The two easiest types of cases to win are (a) residential - due to Supremacy of Contract and (b) wrong registration - due to "de minimis".  Indeed until recently we has been boasting that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing. We simply can do nothing about a terrible judge.  The judge seems - I say seems because we haven't had all the details - to have ignored "de minimis",. got fixated on a sign and awarded unreasonable behaviour costs.  A totally bizarre judgement.
    • You mean your witness statement 
  • 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

Triton Credit Serives - Why don't they listen


Mav75
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4773 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

Okay guys,

 

Thanks for all your help but this has now gone a step further and I've even had to get involved. Sarah called up and paid £50 by debit card to show willing and was advised by the operator she would recieve another letter in 7 days. The letter duely came and said she needed to call to make a reasonable repayment plan. She did now offering £60 as she is scared stupid of going to court, they said the minimum they could accept was now £450. She explained that this was ludicrous and she was advised it wouuld have to go to the lefal dept then.

 

Another week and another letter, advising of a notice of legal proceedings. She called them whilst I was present and they offered a new repayment plan of £270pm again madness. My sister is now contemplating getting a high finance loan out with Black horse to pay them off. As they say they will now instruct their solicitors to write to her and advise her of a court date?????

 

Why won't they accept a reasonable repayment plan? and as she is no longer recieving statements how can she check if they are adding charges.

The way these companies work is dispicable, I tried to speak with them but they said they would only deal with the account holder.

 

HOW DO YOU GET THEM TO SEE SENSE???????Is there anything legal she could threaten them with????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, they are just trying intimidate her into exactly that, paying it off by getting more credit.

 

It's unlikely they will take her to court, even if they do, as long as she attends a judge will only order payments she can afford and should tell them where to go with regards to any costs.

 

Don't phone them, put an offer in writing, explaining that this is the maximum that she can afford per month.

 

I'm starting to love this document ;)http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/50F06527-9FC5-4610-B385-999D6E2A8950/0/oft664.pdf

Physical/psychological harassment

2.5 Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive.

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

.....

f. pressurising debtors to pay in full, in unreasonably large instalments, or to increase payments when they are unable to do so

 

Show her that and quote from it in any letter. Page 16. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mav,

 

Firstly, Sarah must stop dealing with these people by phone keep all correspondence in writing. She needs to work out a budget using the budget planner stickied in this forum at the top of the page. Work out how much she can afford to pay per month and offer this amount and no more. There is no point in agreeing to pay more than she can afford as this will only end up in her defaulting on the agreement. Provided she makes regular payments they will not take her to court.

 

Tell her to try the following letter:

 

Dear xxxxx

 

Account no xxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter of XX/XX/XXXX. I am very disappointed that we seem unable to reach a satisfactory compromise in this case. I am also concerned that your letters seems to contradict your response in telephone conversations regarding your refusal to accept a reasonable payment plan. I would therefore appreciate it if you could keep all future correspondence in writing. As I have already explained, I can only afford £XX per month at the present time. This is the only realistic payment proposal bearing in mind my personal budget. Please find enclosed budget plan.

 

You have stated in correspondence your intention to commence proceedings in the County Court against me. The commencement of legal proceedings under such circumstances could be counter to the ‘Overriding Objectives’ of the new Civil Procedure Rules. You will be aware that the ‘Overriding Objectives’ underpin everything the court does. Moreover, paragraph 4 of the Protocols Practice Direction states that in cases not covered by an approved pre-action protocols, the court will expect the parties “to act reasonably….. in trying to avoid the necessity for the start of proceedings”.

 

I would suggest that your consistent refusal to accept my offer could be viewed as unreasonable and I would ask the court to consider this matter with reference to the ‘Overriding Objectives’. This could leave you liable to paying for your own costs. I’m sure that we could sort this without the need to take the time of the courts and the offer of XX per month, is of course still open to you to accept.

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi there, what an interesting read... Although I am unable to get the end of it, and discover what happened.

 

We are about to change two mortgages over the next six months, which in total will cost us £ 9000.00 !!!! A lot of money. I will fight it all the way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Just to give an update:

 

After sending multiple letters they accepted a monthly payment of £60pm, they started calling again after 3 months saying it now needed to be reviewed and asked for a budget sheet.

 

We sent one and are awaiting there reply, despite stating in all letters that we want correspondence to be in writing they continue to call.

 

My sis has got a lot tougher with them and has found this thread really helpful, to the point I only get called once a week or so.

 

I would like to thank all who offered help, it was gratefully received. I wouldn't hesitate to use or recommend this site to others.

 

Cheers

Dave

aka Mav

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear about what is happening.

 

Take a look at this link. There is plenty of helpful info to really help you guys sort these people out.

 

National Debtline England & Wales | Debt Advice | Factsheet 03 Harassment

 

Remember that telephone calls from them after a reasonable request for them not to call in writing could constitue a criminal offence. I usually advice people to write including this three sentences.

 

"As I am sure you are aware Harassment of Debtors is a criminal offence in England and Wales under Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

Furthermore, continued telephone calls after the receipt of a request not to call may constitute a criminal offence under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

 

In addition every individual has a right to be free from harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997."

 

and to send it recorded!

 

make a note of continued calls!

 

and think about complaining...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
Thanks for all your help but this has now gone a step further and I've even had to get involved. Sarah called up and paid £50 by debit card to show willing and was advised by the operator she would recieve another letter in 7 days. The letter duely came and said she needed to call to make a reasonable repayment plan. She did now offering £60 as she is scared stupid of going to court, they said the minimum they could accept was now £450. She explained that this was ludicrous and she was advised it wouuld have to go to the lefal dept then.

 

I know (from experience) that Triton (Try-it-on?) seem to think they can get away with murder, but threatening to pass on a debt to their lethal department seems extreme even for them.

:jaw:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...