Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I got a text message from Royal Mail last Thursday to say they would be delivering a package to me that day. I was out with my wife all day, and got another message later that day to say the package had been delivered to me or a "neighbour". When we arrived home, no card had been left by RM, so my wife checked with all our neighbours to se who it had been left with. But it hadn't been left with any of them.   The text message also had a tracking number, and when I checked the RM tracking site it just said "The system is currently unable to confirm the status of your item with reference WJ915772456GB . Please try again later". 4 days later, it is still showing the same message. And to make matters worse, I have no idea who the package was from, but I am expecting several deliveries.   I have trawled RM's website looking for a number to ring to report this, but every option I select invariably just returns to the original page. CAn any of you suggest a number for me to call to report this? I live in the Belfast area.   Now, an aside to the original problem, I also got a text the same day from the RM number, to say "There is an item waiting to be confirmed by Michael" (ie me), which goes on to impy that I had won a prize in RM's annual Currys prize draw. It includes a website address to go to to claim the prize. Now I'm no dozer, as we say here, and I know its a [problem]. But is it possible the 2 incidents may be linked? The first to give the impression that there was a package for me, the second to imply the package is a prize which I have to visit a website to claim? Its the time of year when almost every household in the country is expecting some sort of package in the run up to Christmas, so would be a fairly easy [problem] to pull. I'm not even impressed by the use of my name an mobile number, as I'm bound to have had these stolen in a security breach at sometime or other.   If there is a genuine package, I know its highly likely that I'll never receive it now. But I need to know where its from so I can let the sender know asap.
    • they cant just change their mind as to what condition was breached, it has to be given on the screen ticket ad the NTK and match one of the conditions on the signage at the time.   If I employed you to cut my grass and you did a rubbish job of that and I decided to sue you for not watering the flowers I cant suddenly change my mind when I realise that is a loser and say that you didnt cut it in a nice stripy pattern when there was no such mention of that condition in the agreement.   GOGW is admissible to show that thier client doesnt really have a contractual claim for the sum at all. they will say they are being generous but the truth is they are abusing the courts to try and coerce you into paying money that isnt actually owed and they know it. half of what they ask for is unlawful under the terms of the POFA but they do like to try it on as it mitigates their costs of the actions they lose
    • so just follow the advice given in the other threads and if they are stupid enough to threaten court action you respond to that but nothing before that.   The barriers might have been removed due to a loack of planning permission so chack with the council. If they know nothing about any of it then enquiries to the land agnets/management co would be in order.
    • "Dear Simple simon" as Simon Renshaw Smith owns the company   drop the reference to your lawyer. if you had one he would be writing this letter dont ask for an explanation,  it only repeats what you say 2 lines later anyway
    • you ignore this begging letter. Also yu check with the council about planning permission, if you cnat find it on the planning portal you ask the council planning dept about any applicatiosn for that address. You cnat assume things but you can state that you do not belive they have the necessary contracts/permissions/consents because they have failed to provide them when requested under CPR 31.14 now there is a thing called Standard Disclosure for all civil proceedings (CPR 31.6) so they cant wriggle out of it so easily as that includes anything that adversely affects their case so if they wont produce their contract with the LL then you can say that you believe they have failed to do so because it aversely affects their case. they are then caught by the "when did you stop beating your wife" impossibility.   make sure that you have all documents you need to avoid them throwing it back at you but generally there wont be an equivalent if you arent the driver!  
  • Our picks

Sign in to follow this  

Hackers access 5.9m bank cards at Dixons Carphone

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 551 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

Hackers access 5.9m bank cards at Dixons Carphone


Dixons Carphone says it has been the victim of an "unauthorised data access" in which millions of customer bank card details were targeted over the past 12 months.


The company believed there were attempts since last July - only discovered over the past week - to compromise 5.9 million cards in one of its processing systems for Currys PC World and Dixons Travel stores.


It said there was currently no evidence of any fraudulent use of the information - with the vast majority of the cards having chip and pin protection.


However, Dixons Carphone said it had notified card providers to 105,000 non-EU issued cards that did not have chip and pin technology so those customers could be immediately protected.


In addition, Dixons Carphone said 1.2 million personal data records were hacked.


It admitted non-financial personal data, such as names, addresses or email addresses, was accessed but it again insisted that it had seen no evidence of any fraud at this stage.


The breach was currently being investigated by police, it said, while regulators had also been informed.





please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.



Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...