Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Citi, arrow, Cap quest remediation of account letters today?

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2056 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Hello all,

My very first post ever on here.

Please can I bend ears, pick brains as I'm confused about the letters I've had today.


Letters in my maiden name, I was married in 2003.

Debt amount 943.43


I understand the letters are stating they are a statement from year 2012 right through to 2018.

Stating they haven't applied interest or sent statements and I do understand this with an apology.

Original debt citi financial

Then it's saying passed or changed to arrow and now cap quest have got the debt.


I do recall cap quest contacting me on my mobile a few weeks ago, I didn't recognise number so did a Google search.

Didn't ring them back and thought nothing of it.


Today came home with letters with different dates from 12 to 2018.

Every single ccj or default has been lifted off my credit file 2 months ago.


Following a painful debt paying process I can honestly say this has blown me.

I'm worried.

I have paid everything and now I've got this.


On one of the statements in May 2013, it appears I've paid AND I do not recall me ever paying this, but a 15.00 payment has been made.....

This has thrown me and no idea what it means.


The start of letter reads, fixed term credit agreement, with ms E Maiden name and citi financial.


If you require further info or for me type out what they say, each letter is the same, just different years.

However, each year is dated 1st May 2012, then 1st May 2013 etc.

Checked out the days unless they work on a Sunday....


The only letter that's different is one printed this week.


It's ref is remediation of account.

It is from Arrow and makes no ref to cap quest apart from saying if wish to discuss at bottom.

Stating under rules cca 1974 stating required by law to write and noticed that we haven't written to you.


Further saying that a full review of my account and failed to provide me with statements since May 2011.

To remidy this, we have compiled all your statements.

On the what does this mean to you.

It states, this exercise does not affect your account, repayments or your obligations to repay.


If anyone knows what it means and what I need to do.

Not sure about this payment In 2013 either.


Not sure the action to take on this

Not sure the action they can take on me.


Thank you

Edited by dx100uk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore it. It sounds like an automated letter. Theyre also very well known for making up fictitious payments

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..



If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you renegadeimp..... I've got a recording app on my phone, I forgot I had it. Just listened into a message I've left. States a personal call for Miss...... I haven't been called that since 03. He sounded scary!

I won't reply to this, I won't answer my phone either. It seems since I've blocked them, they've contacted me 58 times!!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore all calls. If they were legit, it would be in the form of a letter. The fact that they dont hold any current info shows its a junk debt and theyre trying their luck.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..



If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest that these statements are just them catching up with a mistake CITI the original creditor has made when they have sold this debt onto the Arrows group [capquest are part of this group]


Arrows are debt buyer that purchase debts for about 10p=£1 then try and fleece the unaware out of the full amount with lots of scary letters and threats.

No DCA is a bailiffs

and have

ZERO legal powers.


now onto the important bit..


this phantom payment of £15 in 2013

its not unusual for DCA's to invent phantom payments to extend the statute barred date to within 6yrs.


are there and other payments showing prior to this?

in otherwords, if this payment was not listed your debt WOULD be statute barred [6yrs of no payment}?



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...