Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

LCS DCA and small E-ON elec bill, fees have doubled the debt -big principle!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1827 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

Please

Start your own new thread

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

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Around 3 years ago I stopped renting a small lockup+office for temporary storage following retirement, taking care of all utility Co. bills in the process - or so I had thought.

 

I recently had a letter from LCS, Leeds, chasing a final elec bill from then. 

 

I replied that nothing had been left outstanding, and I would be taking it up with e-on direct.

 

e-on subsequently provided a replacement bill for me to compare with my papers from then, and it appears that the bill was a legitimate final-bill on termination of supply - I had simply overlooked to ask for a final bill from them, had taken care of others properly but not e-on on an oversight.

 

I had a redirect in place with Royal Mail, however never received an e-on bill or reminders before it finished after 12 months.

 

The bill amount was £41 and a few pennies, LCS is after £79 which presumably includes £38 admin charge.

 

I have complained to e-on who have advised that as the case is now with LCS I have to deal with/pay them not e-on, and that it includes a fee to them for dealing.

 

I have written to LCS rejecting a 93% increase and requesting they waive it.

 

I have no trouble paying a genuinely overlooked bill, and even an odd fiver maybe for writing some letters and making a few calls to find me after this time. But £38 on £41?!

 

 

So then ...

 

 

It is actually a piddling little bill but a massive principle!

 

Ordinarily I'd just settle and avoid wasting time chasing things around, but this admin-charge excuse for loading all sorts bills etc really sticks in my throat! 

 

Hasn't there been some formal movement/expose recently (with Banks doing the same thing I seem to think?) that dumped a ton of rocks on the inflationary use of so-called admin charges like £25 for an automatically-generated Bank letter for example? 

 

So, is anyone able to point me toward any rulings etc arising from what I am sure I remember as a big slap on the wrist for financial institutions and some others, over their heavy-handed and unreasonable inflating of admin charges?

 

Also, I have done a search on LCS here first before posting this, and there are a few appearances but nothing from which to judge whether they conduct themselves pretty sensibly, or are yet another of the total cowboys out there ...  is anyone familiar with them?

 

I'll probably just pay the original-bill amount because they are entitled to that, and leave them to whistle for anything more, but alongside that I'd like some knowledge of any useful industry-legislation or policy guidelines or even new codes of practise/standards for when they then start to make veiled threats.

 

If anyone can help along those lines I'd be appreciative, thanks.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hannay100
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to LCS DCA and small E-ON elec bill, fees have doubled the debt -big principle!

you are under no legal obligation to pay any unlawful penalty fess.

LCS are total cowboys and have always been so.

they are a powerless dca and NOT BAILIFFS.

nothing they can do to you.

 

 

 

 

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

send a cheque to eon with the reference number etc and if they return it then you owe nothing as they will have failed to mitigate the debt.

If it is a business contrcat it may well be that they can add fees to the bill wich they couldnt with a domestic tariff but as you will ahve paid off the bill then the third party dca cant sue you for their fee because you have no contract with them and there has been no legal assignment of the debt.

they are relying on you paying up, that is all but sometimes stupidity intervenes and they become stubborn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you ericsbrother, useful thoughts and options! 

 

Since coming back to find your additions I have in fact followed similarish paths - I went to e-on's payment portal to pay the legitimate bill direct - with which I have no argument.

 

The process wouldn't complete and a window opened offering an apology and asking that I call the customer support number and someone would take my payment.

 

The Agent online was surprised at first that she couldn't put the payment through, but then reviewed the details and advised that my user account from that property/time was no longer active (Duh!), that the recent copy bill was sent simply to validate LCS's claim/involvement, that the bill was therefore not *live* nor linked to any active/accessible customer-account on her system, and that my dealings - whatever I intended to do - would have to be with LCS.

 

So I advised e-on that I was happy to settle what had been shown to be a legitimate bill, and that I would make payment of precisely just the bill-amount to the nominated LCS account as required to do, via a PayPoint using cash - which I did shortly after.

 

I have notified LCS that they are holding e-on's money and that e-on is aware, also that their fee-for-acting is wholly unacceptable and no further payment to them will be made.

 

I expect they will rattle their cage for a bit, but fundamentally they have nowhere to take anything ... unless you or anyone know otherwise???

 

Thanks again for the further advice/recommendations, apologies for missing them until just now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Hannay100
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...