Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you need to ring northants bulk and ask for a copy of the judgement and the claimform by email pdf. it is quite usual for them to not have a copy of the claimform. so you need to record the call and ask them to read out the particulars of claim and the address it was sent too.     old wives tales , if you have a debt owing that shows on your credit file or you know exists from say the last 7yrs you should NEVER move without WRITTING to the debt owner with your new address. never run from debt which falls within the above .     all mortgage style SLC loans that were not deferred with erudio following the gov't sale in 2013 and that did not have a court claim raised within 6yrs are SB'd.   drydens simply did this because they wrote to your old address, got no response, and knew they'd get a default roboclaim CCJ where no human checks anything.   shot yourself in the foot.      
    • yep.   if all these are still owned/with the original creditors and you are not paying any powerless DCA's  then little point in any CCA requests at this stage unless any (non OD A/C's) are say pre 2000 opening.   our pro rata letters are the way to go you'll find those in the debt collection section of our library.   get any income payments on going or otherwise moved into a parachute A/c.   it is most probable that whatever you do most A/c's will be defaulted once this is done if not already. bearing in mine your wish to re mortgage or move in a future, it is most probable that the quicker you do default , the earlier a DN will be registered thus the earlier these will not show following their 6th birthday. this might involve you thinking about stopping all payments now ensuring this does happen, then resuming payment under a pro rata scheme self administered , once this happens.   just be aware that no DMP providers will ever question enforceability, should that be relevant.     
    • LL would have Absolutely no chance of getting the smart meter changed back.....
    • slow down ...read what i'm asking , stating and trying to clarify.. it all might seem useless or totally irrelevant but it's important information moving forward with the whole situation and useful in the SPC claim moving forward     there was not 2 loans - the litigated OD is not a loan but it appears from your comment here..     sorry but then you did get scammed on many fronts... they allowed you to settle the loan exploiting your confusion over thinking it was the litigated account. they didn't tell you either and they would also have been aware of your statement filed response form:   The respondent had a junior account with the Bank of Scotland since a young age.  The Bank of Scotland offered the Respondent a loan of around £2500. This Respondent serviced the loan until losing her source of income and ran into some financial difficulty resulting in defaulting in servicing the loan.   they settled for a discounted sum... why? we usually find this is because they hold no enforceable paperwork at all. or was full of charges , charges could have been the discount or it could have been due to 'a business decision' ...   but sure as eggs is eggs there is no way 1st credit would not have raised a court claim for both the OD and the loan unless there was a very good reason. they didn't that smells...badly.   OD 's are notoriously difficult to litigate upon if defended properly...but with a loan in the same claim, with enforceable paperwork, they would have almost been guaranteed to win.   it's also a shame you didn't come where before you did anything but we are where we are.   now the above might seem harsh..even petty but our posts are not only for you and your issue they are also for future readers that find us via search engines or read like threads here alerting debtors to frequent pitfalls and innocent wet myself actions many do that all these dca's will and have exploited time and time again over the last +40yrs .   i'll try and get around to properly redacting all your pdf's tonight and get them back up. but before i finish and get on with the above........the status of the claim as it stands now.   From what i can gather the claim now hinges upon proving her ex at the time settled by a discounted payment to HBOS well before the sale to Intrum and the SPC Claim.   In all honestly and with regard to your comments in your previous posts upon his character, i seriously doubt this ever happened. the disclosures from Intrum contain all the OD statements , should that have happened, it would be detailed in those.   there is little point in the claimant hiding that info as they would be in far more legal trouble should they have doctored them than insuring a mere +£1k claim win. Even 1st credit wouldn't pull such stunts.   Sorry but there is little point in requesting HBOS to attend any future hearing, nor hoping the SAR shows anything different to the statements the claimant has disclosed . That will cost you more money , and more money in terms of the claimant attending another hearing.   there is one exploitation i see. that being the mention of a default notice. the claim states:  The respondent fell into arrears under the Finance Agreement. A Default Notice was Issued by the Original Creditor .   now default notices are not issued for OD A/C's (which ties in to the possible loan confusion and scam settlement i mentioned) . This tallies with a common mistake that many DCA's, including why i keep mentioning 1st credit, which is the previous name for Intrum, made on numerous claims and was one of the reasons for the name change. To Hide that They lost many Statutory Demand and court claims over the non existence of a DN or proof of it's issuance by the OC (a DCA can't issue a DN) .. No copy of a default notice is fatal to to successful  litigation.   even though in this OD case one was not ever needed. (Poor particulars of claim showing copy and paste, and never expecting a claim to be defended but responded to by a wet themselves response , which you did by settling a loan which you believed was the claimed debt when it never was)    other than that you indicate you made an OOC F&F offer in 09-20  have you advanced this option since ?   dx
    • A government-backed firm is looking for new ways to get people to put money aside for a "rainy day". View the full article
  • 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

Partshop Direct wanted me to pay more for price mistake on their website - no chance!!

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 600 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

Before I start this post I wish to say that I accept full liability for this post.


Numerous companies have been named on this site, so naming is not a problem.


I give all members my 100% genuine and verifiable with hard evidence report of what has happened with Partshop Direct.


I have noted 3.12 What is “potentially libelous” as per rules 3.5(i) of the terms and conditions.

I'm happy to and I indemnify the owners of this forum.


Because I know what I say is 100% the truth backed by hard unequivocal evidence.

Speaking the truth in proper context , as I do, is not defamatory or libelous. 


By way of Order Number: …. I received an email confirming the order at 17:18PM 25th May 2019 for £42.98 delivered. 


I then received a phone-call at 16:26PM 27th May 2019, which I recorded automatically (which is not illegal) from somebody claiming to be DeWalt (another parts selling company).


The sales person is telling me that that the price I received was wrong on the website and that the product sells for much more.

I'm offered to pay £10 more or request a refund.

I sternly refuse to do either.

I do what I like.


I said to this person that I'm doing neither, and that I'm leaving them to take whatever action they see fit.

However, I also make it clear that my call is being recorded. No objection voiced. 


I said

"For the sake of £10 you'd prefer to damage your reputation by me posting this online?

Do what you want".


Then the usual happens.

What's that?

Sales people think that by repeating themselves they'll get somewhere.

I interrupt the bloke and says,

"Do you understand what I said?"

He confirms that he did.

I said, were done here..  



I then take notice of an invoice at 18:50PM 27th May 2019 of an email time stamped 16:31PM 27th May 2019

- that's four minutes after the phone call above 

(yeah.. OCD is my middle name when it comes to my money and service I receive). 


What's the point of this post?

In case some did not get it,

this nonsense about mistakes with prices  on websites has been going on since the famous Kodak camera case many years ago.


Companies have failed to learn a lesson.

What's that?

Treat customers with respect.

The cost of the respect in the captioned instance above is £10 .

The manager of the bloke who called me and his/her line manager are not thinking far enough. 


Just to be clear,

as I am legally qualified,

I require no lessons on when is a sale confirmed,

when it is an offer and the issues about acceptance in contract law.


I have not alleged that Partshop Direct has done anything illegal.

What they've done has dissed me!


Because my time has been wasted.

My time is valuable to me

- and I spend my time on forums like these as I please. 


The other point of this post is that the British consumer needs to get active and name companies that play the stupid game of,

'Oh our website had the wrong price' - before the contract of sale is completed.

This is sort of thing is slipshod.

The person who should pay any difference, is the line manager in charge of putting prices on the website. 

I don't play these games.  


5 years ago I completed a purchase for a package holiday (and got confirmation of payment received).

Then they call me up and tried the same nonsense

i.e. telling me the price was actually meant to be £300 more.


On that occasion (which is nothing to do with Partshop Direct),

I said,

"Sorry mate - I'm not paying more. Shall I see you in court?"

To which I get,

"This is nothing about court".


To which I said,

"For me it is shall I meet you or your bosses in court?"

To which the bloke goes,

let me consult with my line manager.

Of course they dared not cancel my holiday with a refund.

I got it at the price I paid - end off. 


And finally,

I don't know that DeWalt is Partshop Direct.

My business was with a business called Partshop Direct.


The only reason I mention DeWalt is because it is a matter of fact.

My business is with the seller as seen on a website.

I intend no disrespect to DeWalt if they happen to be a separate business entity. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • dx100uk changed the title to Partshop Direct wanted me to pay more for price mistake on their website - no chance!!

you cant force someone to sell you anything, even if you shove cash in their hands.

The offer and acceptance works both ways so if they have posted the wrong price in error they dont have to sell at that price.


With an online sale the first opportunity they get to reject your offer is after you have completed the online payment so the contract isnt complete until they have accepted the offer, dispatched the goods and you confirm you are happy with the item having inspected it.


It never got that far so you dont actually have a crystallised contract, you have a frustrated contract. 

If the price was significantly different from the going rate and there wasnt an offer on it could be said that there is no reasonable expectation that the advertised price was correct and general terms about errors and omissions trump you payment.


But of course you know this already but presumably have some proof that there was an intention to deceive, like all of their prices being wrong.


If you were the person who pulled out in front of me on the A22 last week then you should know I have a right to report you to the police and use my dashcam footage to show you were driving without due care and attention.


on the other hand blowing my horn to wake you up and make you aware I was there seemed to do the  job so no need to go to all the extra effort.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I thought I said, I require no lecture or advice on contract law. I thought I said "Just to be clear, as I am legally qualified, I require no lessons on when is a sale confirmed, 

when it is an offer and the issues about acceptance in contract law." I might as well not have said that. 


I'm not here to prove that anybody tried to deceive anybody. 


On the issue of deception in pricing (in general😞 online sales organisations would be stupid to create a trail of evidence that leads to them being caught out. My suspicion is that some of them play a numbers game. It goes like this: they know that the average British consumer will fall for the trap paying up on an increased price post-offer. I'm in probably in the 1% of British consumers who will raise some sort of protest and take action. That's fine for British sales organisations because small percentages of people like me don't dent sales. It's all about money mates. It's a great game to snake in loads of people with attractive offers, then up the price on them. Online sales then become an auction of sorts. Did I say 'everywhere'? I did not. 


The average British consumer is their own best enemy for being lethargic on consumer issues and poor customer service. That has been my opinion for the last 15 years and it ain't changing. 


 "If you were the person who pulled out in front of me on the A22 last week the you should know I have a right to report you to the police and use my dashcam footage to show you were driving without due care and attention. on the other hand blowing my horn to wake you up and make you aware I was there seemed to do the  job so no need to go to all the extra effort."


Seriously? Are you for real? I fail to see what any of that has to do with this thread or this forum. 



Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, honeybee13 said:

Err, no, I'm on the site team.



I know of no rule saying that I have to ask a question or have any answered. 


I've shared my accurate experience in the seeding post of this thread and my honest opinions about things general and specific. If it my honesty and plainspeak are not appreciated remove the post. End off. Just be clear. I have not be rude to you. I have used no foul or offensive language to you. Once I see site team members turn up I know what's up, from long experience on many forums. Shall we leave it there - please. If you opt to delete my post and the thread, that's fine - I have screenshots and will post the same report elsewhere. Bye. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is brilliant......I have no idea who what or why, but I'm so glad I'm no longer this angry.


Good luck Capt Walker...😀

Edited by Bazooka Boo
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!



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

This is brilliant......I have no idea who what or why, but I'm so glad I'm no longer this angry.


Good luck Capt Walker...😀

Not sure who is angry. I might have been dissed but that doesn't mean I'm angry. But on social media inferences are regularly turned into fact. I deal short shrift with loads of businesses who try to diss me. I have my scripts well prepared for most scenarios. 


Speaking out about a terrible waste of consumers time is not about being angry (in case anybody thought so). There is nothing wrong with being angry, so long as anger is expressed in an appropriate way. But maybe consumers need to get angry - it's just about how that is expressed. I prefer 'angry' consumers speaking up about the nonsense that some companies do, in preference to lethargy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!



Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...