Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • 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

Lowell claimform - 3 sep CAT debts ***Claim Discontinued***


disneygirl
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 866 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

Hi Andy

If info required below "Linked Addresses" I can pm it to you.

Thanks

 

Particulars of claim for reference only

 

1)The Claim comprises the following Agreements the Defendant entered into:

a. JD Williams & Company Limited with reference ,,,,,,,,, and current balance of £1319.67

 

b. JD Williams & Company Limited with reference …….. and current balance of £246.50

 

c. Express Gifts Limited with reference ,,,,,,, and current balance of £1209.97

 

The Agreements were terminated as payments were not maintained and subsequently assigned to the Claimant,

 

which claims:

a) The total of the said sums being £2776.14

b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, but

limited to one year, being £222.09

c) Costs

 

 

Defence 1 
The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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.
.
1.Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with J D Williams and also with Express Gifts but do not recognise the account numbers referred to by the claimant.
.
Paragraph 2 is noted but not admitted. The claimant would not be aware of any alleged breach or in a position to plead such fact as an assignee as the defendant did not enter into any agreement with the claimant and is therefore put to strict proof to verify the alleged statement of its particulars.
.
3.Paragraph 3 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served.
.
On the 22/07/2019 reference “Express Gifts” (sent by recorded delivery, received 24/07/2019) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

.

On the 23/07/2019 concerned about a J D Williams account shown on my Equifax credit file I discovered the following:

Linked Addresses

1

 

Mail Order Agency from Jd Williams Ta Fashion World / XXXXXXXXXXXXX14FW

Name

 

Date of Birth

 

Monthly Terms

0 @ £ 0

Status

Settled

Payment Frequency

Monthly

Current Balance

£ 0

Start Balance

£ 0

Credit Limit

£ 0

Default / Delinquent Balance

£ 0

Start Date

28/03/2014

Date Updated

29/04/2019

Date Last Delinquent

Date Satisfied

20/04/2019

Default Date

 

I phoned J D Williams on 23/07/2019 (0345 026900) at 18.02hrs I explained to the person I spoke to that I was trying to find out details of any old accounts I may or may not have held in my name “xxxxxxxxxx” at my current address since 2010 or my old address xxxxxx from 1995 until 2010. I also asked about the Equifax entry as shown above.

 

The person I spoke to at J D Williams listed a lot of the items that were purchased on both accounts, and except for shoes none were near my size, her recommendation is for me to ring Lowell and dispute both accounts (even though claim form issued) and both accounts should be returned to J D Williams as being in dispute as a possible fraud investigation.
.

On the 24/07/2019 reference “J D Williams” (sent by recorded delivery, received 26/07/2019) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

 

4.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:
.
(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and
(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and
(c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;
.
4.As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
.
5.On the alternative, if 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.
.
6.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.
.
Regards

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have brought forward the particulars of claim and now you will note that that your responses to not align the numbers within their particulars.

 

Also you cant add a table of linked address if this is being submitted vis a MCOL..that is something you would reserve for your witness statement should it proceed that far.

 

Regards

 

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Items altered shown in bold red

information on Express Gifts (bold Red) just discovered tonight on different credit report site

 

1)The Claim comprises the following Agreements the Defendant entered into:

a. JD Williams & Company Limited with reference ,,,,,,,,, and current balance of £1319.67

 

b. JD Williams & Company Limited with reference …….. and current balance of £246.50

 

c. Express Gifts Limited with reference ,,,,,,, and current balance of £1209.97

 

The Agreements were terminated as payments were not maintained and subsequently assigned to the Claimant,

 

which claims:

a) The total of the said sums being £2776.14

b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, but

limited to one year, being £222.09

c) Costs

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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.
.
1.Paragraph 1a is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with J D Williams but do not recognise the account numbers referred to by the claimant.
.

Paragraph 1b is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with J D Williams but do not recognise the account numbers referred to by the claimant.

.

Paragraph 1c is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with Express Gifts but do not recognise the account numbers referred to by the claimant.

.
Paragraph 2 is noted but not admitted. The claimant would not be aware of any alleged breach or in a position to plead such fact as an assignee as the defendant did not enter into any agreement with the claimant and is therefore put to strict proof to verify the alleged statement of its particulars.
.
3.Paragraph 3 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served.
.
On the 22/07/2019 reference “Express Gifts” (sent by recorded delivery, received 24/07/2019) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

.

Further to Express Gifts my credit report shows Account Satisfied on 25/10/2015 for the same value as claimed.

.

On the 23/07/2019 concerned about a J D Williams account shown on my Equifax credit file I discovered the following:

That a person or persons unknown at my old address were using a variation of my surname but a completely different date of birth for an account at J D Williams, Account Start Date 28/03/2014 – Account End Date 20/04/2019.

.

I phoned J D Williams on 23/07/2019 (0345 026900) at 18.02hrs I explained to the person I spoke to that I was trying to find out details of any old accounts I may or may not have held in my name “xxxxxxxxxx” at my current address since 2010 or my old address xxxxxx from 1995 until 2010.

I also asked about the Equifax entry as indicated above.

The person I spoke to at J D Williams listed a lot of the items that were purchased on both accounts, and except for shoes none were near my size, her recommendation is for me to ring Lowell and dispute both accounts (even though claim form issued) and both accounts should be returned to J D Williams as being in dispute as a possible fraud investigation.
.

On the 24/07/2019 reference “J D Williams” (sent by recorded delivery, received 26/07/2019) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.
.

4.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:
.
(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and
(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and
(c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;
.
4.As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
.
5.On the alternative, if 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.
.
6.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.
.
Regards

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

pers I wouldn't go into that amount of detail.

don't do the claimants work for them.

it's for then to prove things not for you to disprove them at this stage?

IMHO..simply pluralise the replies i'e agreements, original creditors,, etc etc

…………..

 

sorry..I though it was generally accepted by you now you did have these accounts?

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

will keep trying until I get it right

 

1)The Claim comprises the following Agreements the Defendant entered into:

a. JD Williams & Company Limited with reference ,,,,,,,,, and current balance of £1319.67

 

b. JD Williams & Company Limited with reference …….. and current balance of £246.50

 

c. Express Gifts Limited with reference ,,,,,,, and current balance of £1209.97

 

The Agreements were terminated as payments were not maintained and subsequently assigned to the Claimant,

 

which claims:

a) The total of the said sums being £2776.14

b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, but

limited to one year, being £222.09

c) Costs

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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.
.
1.Paragraph 1a is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with J D Williams but do not recognise the account numbers referred to by the claimant.
.

Paragraph 1b is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with J D Williams but do not recognise the account numbers referred to by the claimant.

.

Paragraph 1c is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with Express Gifts but do not recognise the account numbers referred to by the claimant.

.
Paragraph 2 is noted but not admitted. The claimant would not be aware of any alleged breach or in a position to plead such fact as an assignee as the defendant did not enter into any agreement with the claimant and is therefore put to strict proof to verify the alleged statement of its particulars.
.
3.Paragraph 3 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served.
.
On the 22/07/2019 reference “Express Gifts” (sent by recorded delivery, received 24/07/2019) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

.

I phoned J D Williams on 23/07/2019 (0345 026900) at 18.02hrs.

The person I spoke to at J D Williams listed a lot of the items that were purchased on both accounts, and except for shoes none were near my size, her recommendation was for me to ring Lowell and dispute both accounts (even though claim form issued) and both accounts should be returned to J D Williams as being in dispute as a possible fraud investigation.
.

On the 24/07/2019 reference “J D Williams” (sent by recorded delivery, received 26/07/2019) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.
.

4.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:
.
(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and
(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and
(c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;
.
4.As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
.
5.On the alternative, if 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.
.
6.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.
.
Regards

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Particulars of Claim for reference only

 

1)The Claim comprises the following Agreements the Defendant entered into: JD Williams & Company Limited with reference ,,,,,,,,, and current balance of £1319.67

 JD Williams & Company Limited with reference …….. and current balance of £246.50.Express Gifts Limited with reference ,,,,,,, and current balance of £1209.97

 

2)The Agreements were terminated as payments were not maintained and subsequently assigned to the Claimant,

 

which claims:

a) The total of the said sums being £2776.14

b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, but

limited to one year, being £222.09

c) Costs

 

Defence

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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.


The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.

The claimants claim is denied for the three alleged agreements I have never held any agreements with the various companies under the references numbers referred to.


2 Is noted but not admitted. As above I have no knowledge of the various agreements therefore any alleged breach or assignment is irrelevant.

Notwithstanding the above on the 22/07/2019 reference “Express Gifts” (sent by recorded delivery, received 24/07/2019) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

 

On the 24/07/2019 reference “J D Williams” (sent by recorded delivery, received 26/07/2019) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.
.

It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence  in support of its claim as requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:
.
(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement/s and

(b) Show and evidence the nature of breach and termination and service of  a Default Notice pursuant to section 87(1) CCA1974
(c) show how the Defendant 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;

As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
.
On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of  debts, 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.
.
6.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.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct...not really necessary to add reference numbers

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

no

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

Your keen .....may not get that far once they digest the above defence :wink:

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

unredacted PDF

removed.

 

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

std dq [n180] they always send just to supposedly unsettle you.

await your blank one from the court.

 

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

or research this now

part of cag is selfhelp during the downtimes during progression to know what to do next

just about any claimform thread in this forum details what happens and what to do.

 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi

Still awaiting dq [n180] from court is this unusual re the amount of time since posting defence?

Checked MCOL nothing shown except dates defence submitted and received.

Any thoughts much appreciated, even if its only to bite my tongue and to sit and wait for the court.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Until it states Allocated on MCOL.....you wont get a DQ which signifies that Lowell's have not informed  the court to proceed

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

you are only away for a week

wont matter if yours comes whilst away.

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...