Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Their Order is somewhat confusing...yes you get your set a side and they will not object.   No defence has ever been submitted so it can't stand.(unless you submitted a defence with your application ?) They then state Directions Questionnaires be issued (goes to allocation) and then the next paragraph states the claim is stayed.   Anyway the " Schedule  " is irrelevant it's the " ordered by consent " part that matters.....claim is stayed.     Typical Robbers Way     Andy    
    • Yes thanks both  Have been on the phone to a UC call centre today  to help someone in my Council ward, they said that there is NO paper based system, but if someone is blind or has a vulnerability that makes it difficult to access  then what TomTom has linked to is a way to do it.  That mythbuster link is very useful indeed. DWP are known for pushing easy options  (for them) but will help at a Jobcentre if no other way.
    • UKDomains that's a great shout, I'll open a support ticket on LBC & hopefully they can provide that information.   I've just spent 2 hours in branch, it turns out the fraud dept. never received the proof of entitlement that the branch scanned & emailed to 2 separate email addresses given. That has led to the 3 chargeback amounts, & once again the girl on the other end of the phone had "no idea" about the £685.16, & said "it must be a calculation" well that's good & vague. I have the name of the person in branch I've been dealing with (who has been great btw, & has suffered through this this with me).   Also, by sheer coincidence, she was dealing with the very same rude woman in the fraud dept. who refused to give me her name the other day, but did provide it to the lady in Branch. So now I have that in full, & her employee ID.    I did query with the woman in branch, why TSB aren't backing a customer who has proven beyond any doubt that the transaction was legitimate. Her response? "I got the strong impression when I called the Fraud  dept. on Monday, that we've already reversed the funds to Monzo Bank, this is why they want you to pay the money back into your account."   Well how stupid is that, based on what can only have been a verbal claim by Monzo's customer, this has led to TSB saying "here you go".  & then asking me to kindly underwrite their own stupidity.   I have also just received this by email:   Hi Gavin   Thank you for your note and for contacting me about the difficulties you’ve encountered with TSB.     I have passed your note on to my Head of Customer Service and asked her to ensure that either she, or one of her team, contact you as soon as possible.     Thank you once again for contacting me.     Kind regards     Debbie    Debbie Crosbie CEO, TSB         
    • Many thanks for this alternative advice tomtom   Andy
    • You can do it now. I have saved evidence that it was their mistake, so even if the letters arrive it won't come to nothing
  • Our picks

    • Future Comms issues. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/416504-future-comms-issues/
      • 3 replies
    • This is a bit of a lengthy one but I’ll summerise best as possible.
       
      THIS IS HOW THE PHONECALL WENT 
       
      I was contacted by future comms by phone, they stated that they could beat any phone contract I have , (I am a limited company but just myself that needs a business phone and I am the only worker) 
      I told future comms my deal, £110 per month with a phone and a virtual landline, they confirmed that they could beat that, £90 per month with a phone , virtual landline  they also confirmed they would pay Vodafone (previous provider) the termination fee. As I am in business, naturally I was open to making a deal. So we proceeded. 
      Future comms then revealed that the contract would be with PLAN.COM and the airtime would be provided by 02, I instantly told them that this would break the deal as I have poor 02 signal in the house where I live as my partner is on 02 and constantly complaining about bad signal
      the salesman assured me he would send a signal booster box out with the phone so I would have perfect signal.
      so far so good.....
      i then explained this is the only mobile phone I use for business and pleasure, so therefore I didn’t want any disconnection time in the slightest between the switchover from Vodafone to 02
      the salesman then confirmed that the existing phone would only be disconnected once the new phone was switched on.
      so far so good....
      • 14 replies
    • A shocking story of domestic and economic abuse compounded by @BarclaysUKHelp ‏ bank complicity – coming soon @A_Gentle_Woman. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415737-a-shocking-story-of-domestic-and-economic-abuse-compounded-by-barclaysukhelp-%E2%80%8F-bank-complicity-%E2%80%93-coming-soon-a_gentle_woman/
      • 0 replies
    • The FSA has announced large fines against DB UK Bank Limited (trading as DB Mortgages) - DeutscheBank and also against Redstone for their unfair treatment of their customers.
      Please see the links below for summaries and full details from the FSA website.
      It is now completely clear that any arrears charges which exceed actual administrative costs are unfair and therefore unlawful.
      Furthemore, irresponsible lending practices are also unfair and unlawful.
      Additionally there are other unfair practices including unarranged counsellor visits - even if they have been attempted.
      You are entitled to refuse counsellor visits and not incur any charges.
      Any charges for counsellor visits must not seek to make profits. The cost of the visits must be passed on to you at cost price.
      We are hearing stories of people being charged for counsellor visits for which there is no evidence that they were even attempted.
      It is clear that some mortgage lenders are trying to cheat you out of your money.
      You should ascertain how much has been taken from you and claim it back. The chances of winning are better than 90%. It is highly likely that the lender will attempt to avoid court action and offer you back your money.
      However, you should ensure that you receive a proper rate of interest and this means that you should be seeking at least restitutionary damages - which would be much higher than the statutory 8%.
      Furthermore, you should assess whether the paying of demands for unlawful excessive charges has also out you further into arrears and if this has caused you further penalties in terms of extra interest or any other prejudice. This should be claimed as well.
      If excessive unlawful charges have resulted in your credit file being affected, then you should take this into account also when working out exactly what you want by way of remedy from the lender.
      You should consult others on these forums when considering any offer.
      You must not make any complaint through the Ombudsman. your time will be wasted, you will wait up to 2 yrs and there will be a minimal 8% award of interest and no account will be taken of any other damage you have suffered.
      You must make your complaint through the County Court for a rapid and effective remedy.

      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2010/120.shtml
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/redstone.pdf
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/db_uk.pdf
       
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/consumerinformation/firmnews/2011/db_mortgages.shtml
      Do you have a mortage arears claim to make? Then post your story on the forum here
        • Like
      • 0 replies
George43

Intrum SD for old HBOS credit card debt ***Withdrawn***

Recommended Posts

have a good night and thank you again, cant express my gratitude

 

I have edited my statement,will do some more work on it and will post it hrere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure ...I have not read it properly but change the following......

 

2) The Respondent has not provided the Applicant with a copy of the agreement and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor as stated in sections 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (hereinafter referred to as “the CCA 1974”) . On May 13, 2019 the Applicant made request in writing pursuant sections 78 of the CCA 197.  The request was posted by recorded delivery and accompanied by the statutory one pound fee (Attachements 2,3 and 4) and was delivered to the Respondent on on 14.05.2019.

 

2. On May 13, 2019 the Applicant made request in writing pursuant section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 . The request was posted by recorded delivery and accompanied by the statutory one pound fee (Attachments 2,3 and 4) and was delivered to the Respondent on on 14.05.2019.As of this date of application the Respondent has yet to comply.

 


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

good morning, hope you slept well

 

The Applicant does not admit the alleged debt and the amount of the alleged debt payable immediately.

There is an unresolved dispute of the alleged debt.

 

The Respondent claimed in the statutory demand (attachment 1) that the Applicant entered into contract with Bank of Scotland and was given the account number ......... and that the Applicant failed to adhere to the contract terms and conditions. 

 

The Respondent alleges that the Applicant is indebted to it in the sum of ......... being the amount outstanding under a contract with Bank of Scotland plc, where the debtor failed to adhere to the contract terms and conditions.

It is further alleged that the account was assigned to Intrum UK Finance Limited.

 

I submit that the statutory demand should be set-aside upon the following grounds:

 

 1) It has been raised previously that the Respondent’s use of a statutory demand is trite law and merely a scare tactic to frighten the Applicant into paying and thereby is an abuse of process.

 

It is the Applicants contention that the use of the insolvency laws as a debt collection tool is a misuse of the insolvency Rules.

 

Under the Financial Services Registrar (Financial Conduct Authority, 2019 )  1st Credit Limited (Trading/Brand Names (May include Previous Names)  is now  under name  Intrum  UK Limited, reference number 718918.

 

The Office of Fair Trading (the OFT) has taken action against the Respondent requiring the company to improve its debt collection practices.

 

The Respondent was previously in breach of Insolvency rules and was investigated by the OFT:

 

 ‘after investigation found that some of its business processes and procedures failed to meet satisfactory standards’ and therefore OFT had to impose requirements over debt collection practices of 1st Credit (change of name to Intrum) (the OFT, 2009).

 

2. The Respondent failed to adhere to requirements imposed by the OFT pursuant to section 33A and section 33D (4) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (hereinafter referred to as “the CCA 1974”) (the OFT, 2009) by issuing statutory demand as a means of a debt collection method.

 

3) On May 13, 2019 the Applicant made request in writing pursuant section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (hereinafter refered to as the CCA1974) .

 

The request was posted by recorded delivery and accompanied by the statutory one pound fee (Attachments 2,3 and 4) and was delivered to the Respondent on 14.05.2019.

As of this date of application the Respondent has yet to comply.

 

In the event that the Respondent seeks to avoid its obligations by suggesting that as an assignee it has no duty to comply with sections 77-79 of the CCA 1974, section 175 of the CCA 1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor.

 

In the case of an absolute assignment, the Respondent is a creditor as defined by section 189 of the CCA 1974.

 

If the Respondent contends that it purchased the right but not the duties of any agreement, the Respondent was reminded that section 189 of the CCA 1974 is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties.

 

Respondent is referred to Jones v Link Financial Ltd [2012] EWHC 2402 (QB) (22 August, 2012) which affirmed that the duty to comply with s78 transfers to the Respondent on assignment.

 

3) The Applicant refers to sections 77-79 of the CCA 1974 which precludes the Respondent to enforce the agreement of the disputed debt.  

 

Section 78 (6) of the CCA 1974 sets out the consequences of failure to comply with such request and states that ‘he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement’.

 

It is drawn to the Court attention that the claimant has not complied with my request and is in default of its obligations under s78 (1)  the CCA 1974 and it is averred that the claimant has no right of action until such time as the default is remedied and the claimant supplies the documents referred above.

 

4) The Respondent is aware that the debt is disputed as stated in the letter (Attachement 4) requesting to set aside staturory demand on the basis of the disputed debt as in s 78 (6) the CCA 1974.

The Respondent failed to get in contact with the Applicant.

 

The Applicant refers the court to the judgment of Mr Justice Warren in the High Court in the case of Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch) at Para 27.

 

 27. "So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt.

 

Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner)."

 

 In respect of judgment of Mr Justice Warren as set out above the applicant avers that there is a clear dispute in relation to this debt and furthermore the Respondent is aware of this.

 

 5) There has been a failure to provide a Default notice in the prescribed form.

It is denied that any Default notice in the prescribed format was received by the Applicant.

 

Service of a default notice is a statutory requirement as laid out in sections 87, 88 and 89of the CCA 1974.

Section 87 makes it clear that a default notice must be served before a creditor can seek to terminate the agreement or demand repayment of sums due to a breach of the agreement.

Therefore without a valid Default notice the Respondents cannot proceed and to do so is clearly contrary to the CCA 1974. 

 

6) The Applicant has not been provided with a statement of account showing how the sums claimed by the Respondent in the statutory demand to be payable have accrued.

 

Until the Respondent provides the aforesaid statements the Applicant is unable to consider any potential defence of set off that the Applicant may be able to raise.

 

In view of the matters pleaded above and for the lack of reasonable dealing with the process by the Respondent before taking this action, the Applicant avers that the service of the Statutory Demand is demonstrably intimidating and an abuse of the process.

 

There are several triable issues listed above and that these matters should be accordingly dealt with as a part 4 claims rather than the matter progressing via the Insolvency courts.

 

The Applicant respectfully requests that the demand be set aside and the Respondent be ordered to pay the Applicants reasonable cost of preparing this application and of attending any hearings in respect thereof.

 

 Accordingly, the Applicant respectfully requests the Statutory Demand to be set aside and that the Court award costs in this matter to the Applicant who is acting as a Litigant in Person.

 

It is also requested that the court consider making an indemnity award in light of the upset and inconvenience that this has caused to the Applicant.

 

Please see the final letter what i could come with.

 

I am still panicking that i am fighting here without success, read that intrum managed to find the original agreement in 2019 with M&S signed in 2007.

that is strange, do banks even have to keep information for more than 10 years

 

I have received a letter from solicitor telling that i should wait until 12 days expire but should send letter to intrum asking not to file a bankruptcy petition until they comply with cca.

 

he said that i can ask then for extension of statutory demand time limits cos creditors compliance with cca request.

 

 any thoughts?

 

thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, George43 said:

I am still panicking that i am fighting here without success, read that intrum  managed to find the original agreement in 2019 with M&S signed in 2007. that is strange, do banks even have to keep information for more than 10 years

 

How you can you expect any success you have yet to respond ? Where have you read that Intrum managed to find an agreement in 2019 that was  12 years old ?

 

1 hour ago, George43 said:

I have received a letter from solicitor telling that i should wait until 12 days expire but should send letter to intrum asking not to file a bankruptcy petition until they comply with cca. he said that i can ask then for extension of statutory demand time limits cos creditors compliance with cca request.  any thoughts? thank you

 

You could...this is known as an Invitation to withdraw ....but given that the 18 days is up this Saturday the Applicant is able to proceed to Bankruptcy petition after 21 days and your CCA request 12+ 2 does not expire until next Friday.I personally would proceed with the set a side application and file tomorrow.The Applicant is in receipt of the request and is aware of the time frame to respond and with the full knowledge that should they proceed after 21 days with full knowledge that your  CCA request has not been provided would be tantamount to abuse of the court process..

 

Time is tight so if you were to approach the applicant I would advise a phone call for speed...inform them that you intend to submit application tomorrow unless they wish to withdraw and confirm same by email today....as you fully expect they are unable to comply to your section 78 request ?


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Hello, thank you again for support.

 

I checked intrum received my request on the 14 th, on the same day they've sent me this: 

we do not have payment plan in place with you in relation to your account.

 

following the recent service of stat dem we write to inform you that we are now in position to present a bankruptcy petition against you.

 

once petition is issued the amount payable would increase with expenses, fees and costs including those of the trustee following bankruptcy.

 

the trustee will be invited to liquidate your assets (e.g. Property) with a view of settling this matter.

 

a copy of this letter is retained on our file for later production to the court to demonstrate that every effort has been made on our part to avoid this intended action.

 

It's a good news right?

they don't have the right to petition yet because Stat demand was served on the 30th.

 

also it proves that issuing stat demand I a scare tactics without intention to file bankruptcy.

also the bankrupt would make them at the end of the queue to claim money not want not what they claim in this legter

 

I found this in http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=53600973 forum

Dianna, would you do anything after this response or just wait?

14 Feb 2019 Reply from Intrum Legal Department - They have sent Notices of assignment from M&S to 1st Credit, signed copy of my agreement dated 5th Feb 2007, True copy of agreement at the time the account was opened, true
...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does not mean they will find yours.....just to clarify you have 18 days from receipt of the demand to either make arrangements to pay all or part of the debt; dispute the debt either partially or entirely; (set a side) or pay the debt immediately. 

 

They have 21 days from the date of service to proceed to a Bankruptcy Petition..in black and white thats this Saturday for you and Monday for them.

 

So its your choice to either phone them or proceed with the application.

 

Here is your IAA...you can edit and complete details,iaa-eng (1).doc

 

You must send 3 copies to the court and attach a copy of the Statutory Demand and your witness statement to each copy

 

Andy


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks thanks

can I use their letter threatening me with bankruptcy again when the 21 days are not expires as well in my witness statement?

 

Will you be able to help me with a witness statement please?

Post 80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No need to ignore their waffle ...follow the procedure.

 

Your witness statement is in post #80 above...it requires headers and finishing with a statement of truth and dated...what help do you require with it ?

 

Also on IAA we need to enter the actual dispute and reason for the set a side...then that's complete.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you

o need help with the statement post 80 with the language and to make it more like lawyer language please

 

The reason to set aside would be? 1.disputed debt

2. waiting for Intrum to comply with CCA 

3. Intrum Using statutory demand as a method to collect debts

4. Intrum breach of Insolvency Rules, not following procedures, saying that after only 14 days they have a right to issue bankruptcy petition (today's letter)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No you dont need to Legalese the statement.....keep it to your words...you are litigant not a Solicitor.

 

As for reasons for set a side I would put.

 

1. The Petitioner has yet to comply to section 78 request.

2. The Petitioner has not served a Notice of Assignment pursuant to  section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925   and sec 82A of the Consumer. Credit Act 1974.

3. An underlying dispute with the original creditor BOS was never resolved.

4. The demand is dated 17th April 2019 and was served on the 30th April 2019.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received a notice of assignment with intrums first letter. It looked different from the normal letters from Halifax but Intrum wouldn't fake the assignment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't they .....?  Well its up to you if you wish to remove 2.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You might be right about notice of assignment, it doesn't look like anything I used to get from Halifax. I also haven't received a letter from Halifax that they assigned this debt to Intrum. Previously with other 4 debt collectors Halifax always sent letters.

the signature as well looks blurred whee in all precious  letters is very clear.

 

I called Halifax last week, they confirmed that the debt was sold to Intrum.

why would Intrum fake notice of assignment if they've bought the debt?

 

CAB just rang me telling that i will have to pay £150  to apply to set aside statutory demand at court. ive read its free?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Notice of Assignment you uploaded in post ~18 may well be from Intrum using Halifax notepaper...difficult to prove...but worth raising it as per point 2.Notice of Assignments can come from either the Assignor or Assignee...but it should at least be on their own notepaper.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you, would you know if i have to pay for applying to court as CAB said £150?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No fee to set a side a SD as there is no fee to issue one.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good mornign;  iam confused with following because in old 6.4. was the creditor served. Please help

The names and addresses of the persons on whom it is intended to serve this application are:

Mrs George 43

 

The names and addresses of the persons to whom it is intended to deliver notice of this application are:

Intrum

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes its a terrible confusing bad english laid out form unlike the old 6.4/6.5 forms.

 

Well you are serving so it must be your name and address and Intrum are being delivered notice


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to confirm so you can check I may be wrong......reads clearer in the guidance notes.

 

16       Provide the name and address of anyone on whom the application should be served: IR 2016, r 1.35(2)(h).   Intrum

17       Provide the name and address of anyone to whom notice of the application should be given: IR 2016, r 1.35(2)(i). Intrum

 

iaa-n-eng (2).docx


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on whom and to whom means the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also add the the following to your list.....

 

As for reasons for set a side I would put.

 

1. The Petitioner has yet to comply to section 78 request.

2. The Petitioner has not served a Notice of Assignment pursuant to  section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925   and sec 82A of the Consumer. Credit Act 1974.

3. An underlying dispute with the original creditor BOS was never resolved.

4. The demand is dated 17th April 2019 and was served on the 30th April 2019.

5. The applicant request any incurred costs in this application


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can i add that the respondent breached because they sent me letter 14 days after the serve of demand saying that now the have a right to procede with bankruptcy petition.

  1. The Respondent’s breach of The Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 Rule 10.4.

I am still not sure about serve and notice of application, maybe i dont need both?

 

Breach of insolvency rules:

demand dated 17, served on 30th, letter dated 14.05 claiming that they have the right for bankruptcy petition already

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No point as you know its not true,they know its not true and just a form of intimidation to put pressure on you....wont help in the matter of setting a side keep to the facts. 

 

Obviously some desk jockey has looked at the date on the SD rather than the deemed served date.

 

If anything attach it to the SD for the court to see but you make no mention


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please fill in your quit date here

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...