Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Will this work?   I disupte this debt because, Firstly i only ever used my phone via wifi, there was never a notification regarding usage and data. The rules regarding roaming usage has changed,  the default was illegal and was disputed. This matter is between O2 and myself.   The debt purchaser has yet to provide any or all of the required documentation.
    • Hi all   Wow, do I have a situation to contend with now! I shall include as many important facts as needed.   I have received a solicitors letter today, by instruction of MY PARENTS claiming they are beneficially entitled to a property I purchased in 1999.   This property belonged to my Grandad who sadly passed away in 1993. He had hand written a will, not witnessed by anyone, leaving the property to my Mother and not his Son. Of course my Mothers Brother wasn’t happy with this and contested it which ended up in court. This dragged on for a long time, it could have been years? Until it was decided the house be sold and money divided equally. From memory I think the legal feels were around £30k ish.   At this time my parents didn’t have jobs and I was able to obtain a mortgage in 1999 and after going on the market purchased the house for £50k as it needed a lot of work. At the time I was very close to my parents and it felt a good thing to keep the house in the family circle as such (like cars sometimes) but was obviously in my name as the owner. I paid the mortgage and utilities on it and it sat empty for ten years whilst deciding what to do, more my Mother not wanting anyone to touch it and change memories.   The council kept writing to me until eventually said it would be a forced sale if nothing done with it. I then obtained additional borrowing to fund the complete renovation and then rented it out with the idea if it reducing the mortgage. Around the same time and during the crash I manged to buy another house needing work, by using equity on first as a deposit and a mortgage on the new house.   My parents would always refer to the 1999 as my house although this felt awkward. A few years along the way (2010/1/2) my Dad purchased their council house at a reduced rate.   I moved out of my parents home in 2014 and into the second house once it was all modernised, which since the relationship with parents has just deteriorated a lot. Arguing about lots and them saying I need to ‘sign the house back over to them’ on more than one occasion.   To fast forward, the tenants moved out of the property recently and my parents found because as creepy as it sounds, I think they used to drive by or watch them. The signing back over has been demanded recently to which I said was ridiculous etc…   Today I get this letter with 29 paragraphs and crux of which being to transfer to property, with vacant possession and mortgage free, to them and in addition any surplus rent from the previous ten years!   The letter is full of lies my parents have told the solicitor such as:   I lived with them rent free in lieu of paying the mortgage They paid all the utility bills and council tax They paid for and carried out most of the work back on the house in between purchase and 2008 when renovated My Father dealt with the letting agents recently and I ‘merely’ signed the tenancy agreement   There was a time, as my parents have always been high maintenance, I had written something for my Mum to say although I own the house, morally it belongs to her as probably thought it would help the relationship. A copy of this has been included, although I think looks slightly different to what I had printed and also says…about asking their permission to sell it and they could move in if they ever wanted, I really do not recall saying that! This piece of paper I refer to has no date or signature.   My goodness, this has completely knocked me for six. Its like history repeating itself!   I have checked with Eon, Council tax etc… so far and all have been in my name and paid for by me.   The letter also says ‘the facts of this case are familiar to you and you ought not to require any further enquiry’ which almost is like the solicitor knows this is all hearsay/BS and no proof? Also that I should respond to the claim within 28 days. The letter was also not recorded in case it makes a difference.   Another paragraph says advises my parents 'have a strong claim that I am holding the property on trust for them absolutely by way of constrictive trust and/or proprietary estoppel' I have no idea what this means!   One thing I should point out, I used to be very much in my parents bubble, asking them for advice, wanting their approval, very much lacking confidence in awareness of my own abilities. It is since I have started thinking for myself they don't have the hold on me their behavior  have become worse.   What are your thoughts please? I really have no idea what to think!   Many thanks in advance as always   E!
    • So I got a phone call on Saturday on my private mobile phone. This call was from Moriarty law ...I had sent my PAP docs back with no e mail address or phone number ...they said they had used a tracing company to find my details ....I have since called them and put in a complaint that they have breached GDPR regs ..they have now suspended any action pending a full investigation. The agent who called me was not very bright to say the least ..he wanted me to make an offer of payment even though as I told him it was only an allegation that I owed the money as ADCB had not sent the original paperwork back..... he then told me that they could take me to court even if I had not got a copy of my signed credit agreement ....I basically told him to jog on ...I'll let you all know the outcome of Moriartys GDPR breach investigation .
    • or should I sent a copy of Ericsbrother's template  ?    Please help!     Unfortunately for you, I was not born yesterday so I will not be paying the demand as there is no liability in this matter because the signage is prohibitive and not an offer of a contract so none has been breached and anyway the POFA limits any charge to the specified sum so your demand for £160.00 is nonsense. As VCS (Vehicle Control Services Ltd) has been spanked at court on this very same thing several times before I suggest that you discontinue this foolishness. Should VCS decide to continue then I shall be asking for a full costs recovery order for unreasonable behaviour and then seek damages for the breach of the DPA/ GDPR as per VCS V Philip, Liverpool CC Dec 2016. Even Will and John, the parking world’s worst solicitors seem to have got fed up with Simple Simon’s stupidity and greed and presumably that it why you are wasting your ink on his behalf.
    • What about?   Dear Sir / Madam I dispute your ' parking charge'. I deny any liability or contractual agreement and I will be making a formal complaint about your predatory conduct to my MP.   You are no doubt aware that Southend airport is subject to byelaws 1997. This is not and cannot be a civil debt. Should you proceed with a civil case an application will be made to strike it out as the civil court lacks jurisdiction to hear such cases.   Having been warned that such an application will be made I will hold you fully responsible for all and any fees associated with this and apply for all costs due to your unreasonable behaviour.   Yours faithfully
  • Our picks


TK MAXX attempted sale sticker swap.

Recommended Posts

Hi guys, 

I need your help


before you all come down on me for what I did I am beating myself up over it and my anxiety is through the roof.


I was in TK Maxx the other day and I swapped a 7 euro sticker with a 19 euro sticker on a pair of Jean's.

Stupid I know when I had the cash-I dont know why I did it.


I went to the till and the lady scanned it and it came up that the 7euro belonged to the makeup section. I had taken the sticker from there.


She definitely copped what I was doing but didn't let on asked if I wanted the item for 19euro and I said yes, paid the actual amount for item and walked out.


She held on to the sticker and I saw her walk away to obviously go investigate.


I'm just wondering now if anything can be done about it now? I paid by card.


I'm also a college student near by and I am so worried they will contact my college with my picture from the CCTV.


Are they allowed to this?


Thank you in advance. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

yea don't do it again...


they wont bother with CCTV etc.

takes up too much staff time to scan 100's of hours of camera footage

simple to confirm you tried the age old dodge you probably learned from a fellow college attendee

and they got paid anyway.






please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.



Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry dx100uk I dont understand what you mean? 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I switched them in changing rooms and then put the make up back. Can they not just put in time stamp in cctv and it will come up then? 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how many members here know about CCTV operations in detail, maybe someone will comment. But as dx100uk says, it's unlikely they will search for this isolated incident.


This is the problem with shoplifting cases, that you end up speculating for weeks over what might happen when we're all second-guessing what someone else may or may not do. I hope you can treat this as a learning curve and remember how you feel at the moment if you're ever tempted to do this again.





Illegitimi non carborundum




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your replies. Are they legally allowed to contact my uni? I had a backpack on so they could clearly tell I was a student. It will ruin my life if I'm kicked out of college for this. Lesson learnt🤢

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather importantly in your case you didn't actually steal anything because at the checkout they told you it had the wrong price on it, told you correct price, and bought it for the correct price. Nor did they accuse you of having switched the stickers. So no offence of shoplifting committed even though it was a stupid thing to attempt to do.


You refer to the price being in Euros so which country did this happen in?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

No offence of shoplifting was committed, but (if in the UK), the offence of fraud by false representation was (as it doesn’t have to succeed : the attempt that exposes another to risk of loss suffices for the offence to be made out).


However, I agree with Will, it is unlikely this will be pursued (If it was a one off!), as action would have been taken at the time.


If it were part of a continued course of attempts, then they might be bothered to go back to check CCTV / card receipts, but unlikely for a one-off.

Edited by BazzaS

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this comes into the world of contract law rather than theft even though your intention was to gain an advantage by deception.

It is about offer and acceptance. You took the item to the till, they scanned it, realised there was an error and offered you the goods at the original price. you accepted that and paid. end of as far as that transaction goes.

They may well think that something smelt but as you didnt make a fuss about the correct price they arent going to start a fight over a non event but beware of trying it on again, the bar code will say exaxtly what the item is, how much and how many they have in stock and yes, if they can be bothered to they will have a look at the CCTV if there is a pattern of such events and something may well be done.

Also consider this, the store may suspect that the shop assistant is in partnership with you and they might get sacked for something that has nothing to do with them.

so learn from this and make things easy for everyone

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ericsbrother : there was the contract (civil law). That doesn’t prevent the (immediately prior) criminal offence though : fraud by false representation.



2 Fraud by false representation
A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

A representation is false if—
(a) it is untrue or misleading, and
(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.
“Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—
(a) the person making the representation, or
(b) any other person.
A representation may be express or implied.
For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

The CPS guidance notes


clarify that no actual gain or loss is required (this being where fraud by false representation has a significant difference to e.g. shoplifting) : the dishonest intent of the false representation at the time it is made is the key, not if the false representation succeeds or not.


Edited by BazzaS

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...