Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks BN. I should add, that any Bailiff action is, to my mind unconscionable under the present circumstances, and the point should have been raised by the Master IMO. As usual our problem will not be, what the amendment says.  But more, what some EA will imply it says, on the doorstep.    
    • Yes agree UB it will be unworkable in practice, the issue being that some EA will regard the Virtual CGA as allowing them to physically force entry later if payment not forthcoming.  Or like some bailiffs used to try to imply that phone call a desperate debtor makes at Compliance stage is in effect a Virtual CGA when itn is nothing of the sort. Rule 1 it is known some  bailiffs Lie. Rule 2 Treat all bailiffs as liars until they prove they are not.
    • I cannot see many people agreeing to any virtual webcam review of goods to be controlled.     Many people in debt may not even have the facilities to be able to do this.   And the few that agree may try to have a laugh at the enforcement companies expense.  e.g. this painting is by well known local artist Peter Ist, but he signs his paintings as  P Ist and this other painting is by Brian Roke who signs his paintings as B Roke.     Who would agree to this without understanding the consequences ?      
    • Well poss unenforceable cca both lets see
    • Although I will be submitting another request as DVLA haven't stated when they responded to VCS with the information.  18th was a Friday,  VCS say they posted the letter on Mon 21th.  Seeing how this SAR has taken this long, I doubt the DVLA went all out to clear the request over the weekend, but we'll see.
  • Our picks

    • 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
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Erudio/Shoosmiths SPC claim - old SLC Loan


Recommended Posts

I haven`t sent anything yet. I received this in response to my SAR made in November.

 

I will email a copy of my current CTax bill and previous addresses today.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

whoops who did read all the posts in the SAR link

 

don't ever use email!!

gives them a freeway to send docs 1 min before a midnight deadline [very important in Scottish claims!!]

use the email ONE MORE TIME

to NOLANS

and

CABOT

tell them that this email address is NOT to be used for ANY documents or letters concerned with the current SPC No.XXXX

you address has now been blocked and bounced.

 

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

no just insert erudio and shoosmiths for cabot/nolans

 

why did you forget the ctax/addresses?

its in the guide and I told you that in post 23.

 

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

oh well you should have and the guide told you too and always has

 

 

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

Erudio has acknowledged receipt of security details and are processing my SAR. Forgot to state that I will no longer accept email correspondence so must do that today.

 

Interestingly, the email has come from the Erudio Legal email address and it states, 

 

"We are treating your Subject Access Request as complex due to the litigation activity that has taken place on your account. This means we will provide a response to you within 90 days. We will respond earlier if we can and will keep you up to date on the progress.

 

We will not be charging a fee for your request as it is not excessive or manifestly unfounded.

 

Please note that we may hold information on your account that is legally privileged as litigation activity has taken place. This means that we may redact some documents that contain privileged advice."

 

90 days my arse! It's hardly complex. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

so you missed form 4a return date I will gather as you've never been back to update us

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
  • 1 year later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...