Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • not sure what you think is going on but they are nothing to do with any official court forms... it's merely a process and fleecing debt buyer must go thru should they be thinking of requesting northants bulk issue a speculative court claim on their behalf.   just send it as is dont change it.   as for d: just put .....the debt purchaser has yet to provide any or all of the required documentation.   dx    
    • if you type in auxillis is our search top right in the red banner you'll see this con over auxillis and supposed courtesy cars , but it's not its an HP agreement is well known here.   9/10 it's ends up with you fronting a court claim out of your own pocket for auxillis against the other parties insurance company that you don't stand a chance of ever winning for a claim against them for the excessive HP hire car costs you got scammed with.   may i be frank that whomever told you looking at the circumstances of you incident that you'd ever win a claim and it not be 50/50 was wrong.   you were in a narrow road in a housing estate with cars parked down one side on a blind sweeping bend exceeding the speed you should have been doing for the stated weather conditions. running into someone's side that pulls out infront of you in such an area and it being where you live too so you know it well would never be the other parties faulty even without the poor weather. if this were to go to court you would lose.   sadly shows you were not driving with due care and attention.
    • I did see not to give those details out, but as these could wind up official court forms, I dont want to be on the wrong side of it.   the areas in boxes D and I, is it ok to say ""refer to appendix A, refer to appendix B"? There s a REALLy long list of "what the hell" I want out of them as this is making zero sense. Not only that, I've got a long list of "this is the hell" I need to send back in the dispute too.
    • the debt has been sold not passed on and yes there is no legislation that prevent a disputed debt being sold.   as for your other questions go read post 4 of that thread again carefully it's all there.   dx  
    • Can talktalk pass on a debt that was in dispute?   Is there a template I can send back? They shoulve have ALL the information anyway seeing as they took the debt over.   Not only that, I didnt get notified by talktalk that a debt was being passed on.   I'm looking over it now and will do it this weekend.   The parts asking for phone number and mail, I dont specifically want to give those out as they're for family use only.. Can I forgo those?
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Regulator finds significant failures at the Presidents Club Charitable Trust


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 967 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

Regulator finds significant failures at the Presidents Club Charitable Trust

 

Commission’s case into the charity concludes that the trustees breached key trustee duties

 

The Charity Commission found that there were significant failures at the Presidents Club Charitable Trust and that its trustees were in breach of a number of their key charity law duties.

 

In a report published today, the Commission concludes that the trustees failed fully to recognise or address risks to the reputation of the charity - and its purpose of raising money for good causes – arising from holding an all-male event* staffed by female-only event staff, who were subject to instructions on their appearance, including that they wear ‘smart, sexy shoes’.

 

READ MORE HERE: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/regulator-finds-significant-failures-at-the-presidents-club-charitable-trust

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...