Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My daughter has been selling unwanted items, mostly clothes, for a couple of years now with no problems until recently.  She sold to someone in Germany before Christmas, which was claimed never got there, so obviously paypal refunded the buyer, no questions, despite her never having any problems before now, which left a negative balance.  She sent it using Hermes, something I have only just realised was a big mistake.  She has proof of postage given to her when the package was collected, although the reference number is now not recognised by Hermes, so getting in touch with them to find out what happened to her parcel is impossible (as many social media platforms have confirmed this).   So the outcome is that while we were trying to get in touch with Hermes, paypal have, very quickly, passed this on to Moorcroft who are now hassling her.  I have told her not to worry about Moorcroft as everyone knows how these people operate, I have reassured her that there will be no visit to the door from anyone.   The only concern she has is whether it will affect her credit file, as she has worked hard to get a good credit rating over the last 4 years and doesn't want something like this to destroy it.  My thought is that it can't as it is not credit, and she hasn't gained financially in any way, quite the opposite really, so it can't have any negative impact on her credit file?  She is prepared to give Moorcrost the money just to get it sorted, but I don't want her to be hasty in giving them people anything.   I've looked at a few posts similar to this and my understanding is that this is correct but just need reassurance to pass on to her.   Thank you
    • It was granted on 17th Feb and i requested to their Leeds address below:   Hermes UK Capitol House 1 Capitol Close Morley LEEDS LS27 0WH   This does look like the correct Hermes UK office address though?
    • You have a judgement against Hermes? When was it granted? You should apply for execution of the judgement immediately. You shouldn't even be asking us. One thing though – you should check that you have actually serve the papers on a real physical address. We have had one case recently against virgin where we discovered that the papers have been served on a postcode – but it was actually a redirection address and that there was no physical address which could be visited by bailiffs. What address did you use for the claim?
    • I would agree, they seem to just take a punt on the hope people cave in.     However, I would ask how to proceed in this instance?  What happens at the hearing as the order from the court states very little.  What should one do at this hearing and what should you do to prepare?  Should I request any further documents from Lowell?  Do I reply to their offer and state a case?   Also I wanted to know if money was paid to Lloyds Bank - then Lloyds Forwarded this as they so selected to Lowell is this allowed?
    • Then surely this proves they dont have a clue what they are litigating over. They use the words credit card in their poc, but they stated a number in the poc is not a 16 digit number which all credit cards have.        
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Drink drivers face swifter justice with new roadside breathalysers


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 989 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Drink drivers face swifter justice with new roadside breathalysers

 

New roadside breathalyser technology and a new approach to road casualty investigation.

 

--government announces bold package of measures to improve road safety

--measures include £350,000 for a competition to bring a new mobile breathalyser to the market

--£480,000 for the RAC Foundation to trial an innovative new approach to road casualty investigation, looking more closely at what is really causing road collisions

 

Drink drivers are to face swifter justice thanks to new roadside breathalyser technology that will allow police to gather on-the-spot proof.

 

READ MORE HERE: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/drink-drivers-face-swifter-justice-with-new-roadside-breathalysers

How to Upload Documents/Images on CAG - **INSTRUCTIONS CLICK HERE**

FORUM RULES - Please ensure to read these before posting **FORUM RULES CLICK HERE**

I cannot give any advice by PM - If you provide a link to your Thread then I will be happy to offer advice there.

I advise to the best of my ability, but I am not a qualified professional, benefits lawyer nor Welfare Rights Adviser.

Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

hope they do it mobile phone users too

 

I went on a 200mls road trip recently with a 1080 360 on the roof

sad I know but viewing the hours of footage we caught 43 people using a mobile whilst driving a car...

 

if the police didn't have to WASTE time and money on policing or roads and people simple RESPECTED others and abided by the rules of the road we could have bobbies back on the beat.

 

sad country ….

 

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

Will they be testing people in self drive cars run by computers ? Give it 20 years and we could all be passengers in cars which we program to self drive to a destination. I would guess at least one person in the car must be fit to drive and be subject to testing. Otherwise you will have people on a night out all drinking and then just getting in their self drive cars to take them home. There will also be people with health issues that might not be allowed to drive, that might see self drive as a way to get back on the road.

 

With computer self drive vehicles, all legislation is going to have to be revised, as will Insurance policies.

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

Would the rac investigation find that it's not speed a major factor in rta but idiot/incompetent drivers?

Everyday i see drivers do things that make me question if they're humans and i swear that by the way they drive a lot of them never passed a driving test.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...