Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you for your reply!   I’ve just had the following response from Disney. Not great at all.   Dear Fishy Thank you for your reply. We kindly confirm that Disneyland® Paris annual passes are usually non-refundable. However, due to the unprecedented situation with CoViD-19, the duration of your annual passes and their benefits have been extended by the number of days our Disney Parks were temporarily closed (123 days), starting from the original expiry date of your annual passes. As previously mentioned, we are unable to put an additional temporary halt on your annual passes; however, we would like to offer you an exceptional partial refund. If you wish to accept our offer, please provide us with a copy of the annual passes of your party as well as the filled in and signed refund form at your earliest convenience. Your annual passes will consequently be blocked. We hope that this information is helpful for you, and we look forward to hearing from you. Yours sincerely, Constantin Guest Communication
    • I have now written up the Claim and will post this, we have also been informed by the DJ they will counter-sue for the full amount if we take them to Court for the £500 we are at a loss? We we have also included interest from the date they refused the Money in May as we are having to borrow to fund the wedding in three weeks, its so disheartening as we also have to pay £415 to put the claim in when they could have just resolved this matter!   Are they not bothered about customers at all, they are prepared to keep money without providing any service at all   Its so shameful
    • I'm afraid lapse of time has got nothing to do with it in this case. At the very minimum, though there is is six years within which to recover a debt – and when the money is paid by way of a mistake, it is six years from the date that the mistake was discovered or could reasonably have been discovered. I understand that your vehicle was damaged in an accident and the repair bill was paid by the insurer. Somehow or other, you were also paid about £2000 ostensibly to pay the garage for the repairs. As the car was already repaired, you didn't pay the money over or query it – but you used the money. I'm afraid that if that is a correct summary of what has happened then I would say that you are obliged to repay the money. If my understanding is correct – then you had probably better contact the solicitors and start dealing with them because I'm sure that they will have no hesitation issuing a claim against you and you will then be liable for the money, plus interest at 8% – plus a measure of costs – if the judgement sum is not paid 30 days of the date of judgement.  
    • Here is the latest draft defence aligned to each item from the POC. I have incorporated PAP detail into Item 4 of the defence in italics. Do I add the detail of CCA into Defence Item 5? Your comments, advice and suggested amendments are welcome.   1. The Claimant ('C') claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced “ref number” and opened effective from 27/08/2016. The agreement is regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, was signed by the Defendant ('D') and from which credit was extended to the Defendant.   Defence 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of the 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.   2.  The Defendant failed to comply with a default notice served pursuant to s87, . CCA and by 05/08/2019  a default was recorded. Defence 2. Paragraph 1 is denied. I cannot recall any dealing with HSBC in the past, I cannot recall the specifics of the alleged agreement.   3.  As at 18/09/2019 the Defendant owed “Bank of SCOTLAND” the sum of 3897281. Defence 3. Paragraph 3 is denied. It is denied that any amounts are due under any agreement.   4. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to the Claimant effective 18/09/2019 and made regular upon the Claimant serving a Notice of Assignment the Defendant shortly thereafter. Defence 4. Paragraph 5 is denied and I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor or Legal Assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars of claim. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) and 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.    5. And the Claimant claims: 1. 397281;  2. Interest pursuant to Section 69 County Court Act (1984) at a rate of 8 % per Annum from 18/09/2019 to 25/08/2020 of 26171 And thereafter at a daily rate of 82 to date of judgment or sooner payment. Date 28/08/2010 Defence 5. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Link Financial & Kearns Solicitors by way of a CPR 31:14 request sent via Royal Mail delivery on 28 August 2020. To date, neither Link Financial or Kearns Solicitors are yet to furnish me with the requested information.   7.Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:- a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; c) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to Sec 87 (1) CCA1974. d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   8. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   9. 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.   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.
    • Hi   I am not really sure where to post this , hopefully it’s appropriate here    At the end of 2017 my partner was involved in a rtc when a car pulled round a bus and hit my car that my partner was driving.   on the advice of family I instructed a car accident management company to deal with the repairs/make necessary arrangements.  The car was fixed and the accident management company paid us a couple of thousand pounds to pay the garage .  The bill never came from the garage and we were told that it had been settled by the insurance company.    when I sold the car a few months ago I struggled to sell to the garage as it was registered by my insurance as a write off.  I was offered significantly less for it because of this.    today I received a letter from a solicitors instructed by my insurance company to recover the money they paid for the repairs back in 2017.    I guess logically/morally my car was fixed and the money from the accident company is extra- although the car was marked by my insurance  as written off yet fixed!   do I need to pay them the sum they are asking or due to the time elapsed etc do I not.  The letter has made me so worried as threats of court action /costs    Thank you 
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 4 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Recommended Posts

You make me want to go off into the woods like a US Survivalist with faithful crossbow, air rifle tent and tools to knock up a shelter. TJ.

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

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It isn't realistic to lock all those with underlying conditions and over 70s in their homes for the rest of the year   It would have to be properly organised. We have various family members

The other ones to worry about are Palantir who are data-mining NHS records, I've read, and are now being paid £1m to do it.

With Schools usually breaking up for the Summer Holidays in July, I do not see the point of sending youngsters back before September.  Government might just have managed to improve on their safety pro

Posted Images

Posted (edited)

Wasn't Cummings allegedly wandering in the woods while he was infected  during his lockdown?

Let alone everyone sneaking into woods to relieve themselves  ...

Doesn't sound safe to me.

 

 

😕

 

All for the want of using some of the claimed unused testing capacity and some actual competent management of the pandemic.

Edited by tobyjugg2

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, brassnecked said:

Yes only issue with Sturgeon is she is so intent on pushing Independence, any and all crises are a tool she uses to chip away.  Johnson & hancock have not handled it well, mind you they planned for the wrong disease and are still floundering around trying to use a flu plan for a SARS.

 

I still think voting her in as PM is the answer

 

She competent and it would remove the independence  issue.

She would probably allow the couple million at most populists to declare independence on one of the UK's offshore tax havens and use the cheap flights to ship them all there

They get their singapore tax haven clone

We get rid of them and the independence issue and get a competent politician

 

Sorted.

  • Like 1

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sturgeon is a one trick pony, SNP policies have failed, their proposed Hate Crime Bill, might even stop us calling DCBL muppets, and Simple Simon of VCS Simple in a post.

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

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just spotted this from the Guardian, on quarantine, etc.

 

This is the first paragraph [my bold].

 

'Another day, another sadly predictable U-turn from the government of Boris Johnson. A few weeks ago ministers were encouraging the public to go abroad for their holidays. They did so without a comprehensive airport testing regime for passengers, unlike in many parts of the world. As restrictions have been lifted across Europe, countries have reported rises in Covid-19 cases. People returning from Spain, which has seen a spike in infections, now face mandatory quarantine. The farce means that the transport secretary will be one of those self-isolating.'

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/27/the-guardian-view-on-a-new-normal-holidays-abroad-quarantine-at-home

  • Thanks 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Boris' fright over being so ill with the virus because of his weight is leading to some interesting developments and I can see Ebay being flooded with NHS prescribed bikes. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, brassnecked said:

Sturgeon is a one trick pony, SNP policies have failed,

 

The effectiveness and focus of her government when compared to England and when considered as working within the constraints set out by Westminster, make that statement seem very dubious

 

Now wasn't that polite?

:-)

Edited by tobyjugg2
  • Haha 1

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, hightail said:

Well Boris' fright over being so ill with the virus because of his weight is leading to some interesting developments and I can see Ebay being flooded with NHS prescribed bikes. 

 

Yes, but hes over that now.

Short tea break over, Back to trashing the NHS

Edited by tobyjugg2

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

People a month ago shrieking ‘why didn’t we shut down all flights in February’ 

 

People now, ‘why have the government introduced a quarantine from spain’

 

Damned if they do, damned if they don’t .

 

Right now Spain has a far higher infection rate than either Britain or France, and on this occasion the government are doing the right thing.

  • Like 1

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, London1971 said:

Right now Spain has a far higher infection rate than either Britain or France, and on this occasion the government are doing the right thing.

 

So you think sending returnees from 'affected' places home across the country with an instruction to self isolate, without being tested is 'the right thing'?

 

 

 

26 minutes ago, London1971 said:

People a month ago shrieking ‘why didn’t we shut down all flights in February’ 

 

People now, ‘why have the government introduced a quarantine from spain’

 

Damned if they do, damned if they don’t .

 

 

No, doing 'whatever' incompetently is the issue.

 

Thats a typical Johnsonite populist type 'avoid the point' response

I'm genuinely surprised. Has Londons' account been hijacked?

 

 

In February, as now returnees should be tested and properly managed.

They weren't and aren't. Thats the issue.

 

Edited by tobyjugg2

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if part of the problem is with the PM only wanting to give people good news. I could have missed something, but I don't remember seeing ministers mentioning anything about risks of travelling abroad while the pandemic is still ongoing.

  • Like 2

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Germany is advising against travel to Catalonia, Aragon and Navarra, the three regions that are closest to the border with France on the Mediterranean side.

 

The FCO is advising against all of Spain, including the Canaries and the Balearics.

  • Like 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

Yes, but as Shapps said when supporting Stanley Johnsons antics country hopping to avoid restrictions

'its only advice

 

 

and in summary of many ministers support of Cummings and Jentricks antics

'its the social distancing that matters and he wasn't caught breaking the social distance rule (as that was only done when he returned into No10 before setting off on his escapades,  and no-one better tell)

 

... and of course, the current social distancing rule is 3 feet - qualified by where possible isnt it?

 

 

 

Follow the examples of those who set the rules?

as they have further defined them?

 

Edited by tobyjugg2

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

https://www.euronews.com/2020/07/27/donald-trump-s-national-security-advisor-tests-positive-for-covid-19-reports-associated-pr

 

"US National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien has tested positive for COVID-19, two anonymous sources confirmed to the Associated Press."

 

There is "no risk of exposure to the President or the Vice President"

as the national security advisor has been left soaking completely submerged in a vat of bleach to cure him since the positive test result

He is reported to have screamed his support of the president as he was immersed with the help of a number of the presidential security team

 

"the "work of the National Security Council continues uninterrupted," the White House told AP"

Edited by tobyjugg2

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He'll be pumped full of the real stuff ... like remdesiver

 

 

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

I wonder if part of the problem is with the PM only wanting to give people good news.

He's been following rather than leading ever since the Cummings debacle.  As people got angry, or bored, and started flouting lockdown he started easing the restrictions in line with how they were behaving anyway.  The one thing he can't afford is for it to appear he's lost control of the situation so the 'guidelines' are continually adjusted to make it look as if we're the ones following them when we're actually setting them - until it all goes wrong and he does have to rein it in again. 

 

I'm astounded that anyone has gone on a holiday to Spain (or anywhere) but they have and they were perfectly entitled to do so.  That so many have does show that people are prepared to return to much more of a 'normal' than I am at the moment and Boris hasn't wanted, or dared, to stop them.  

Edited by hightail
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, London1971 said:

People a month ago shrieking ‘why didn’t we shut down all flights in February’ 

 

People now, ‘why have the government introduced a quarantine from spain’

 

 

 

Yes and the 'why oh why' culture is alive and well on this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

Wee Nicola has handled the epidemic reasonably well, I think. Better than no 10 anyway.

 

 

To be fair wee Nicola doesn't have the responsibility of balancing the epidemic with running the economy. In essence the decisions she makes, the rest of the Union pays for.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

I wonder if part of the problem is with the PM only wanting to give people good news. I could have missed something, but I don't remember seeing ministers mentioning anything about risks of travelling abroad while the pandemic is still ongoing.

 

The UK banned all travel abroad for months.

 

Remember?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was that once restrictions were being lifted, ministers were encouraging people to go abroad if they wanted to but I didn't notice them pointing out possible risks.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

The UK banned all travel abroad for months

Wasn’t it advice against all but non essential travel?  That’s not a ban.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, cjcregg said:

 

To be fair wee Nicola doesn't have the responsibility of balancing the epidemic with running the economy.

 

In essence the decisions she makes, the rest of the Union pays for.

 

Populist English nationalist garbage and Self contradictory (she has no fiscal responsibility + the UK pays for her fiscal decisions)

 

Actually, as already stated, the reality is that she makes her decisions based on the limits imposed by Westminster and NOT as you state.

She just has some leeway in how she allocates the funds

eg more in the peoples interests rather than mainly in a few rich folks interests

 

Imagine a free Scotland with its territorial waters not blocked off from use by English nuclear subs and its fishing not controlled from Westminster ..

How much should they charge the UK to use its waters, let alone own them?

 

.. and at least try understand the ins and outs and whys and wherefores of the Barnet formula before you continue to spout from the lowbrow jingoistic end of nationalistic populist rubbish.

 

 

Edited by tobyjugg2

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
49 minutes ago, hightail said:

Wasn’t it advice against all but non essential travel?  That’s not a ban.

 

Quite true hightail

and as confirmed by Shapps (secretary of state for transport) in support of Johnson snr hopping from one country to another to avoid even the very limited restrictions .. by other countries

 

"Transport Secretary Grant Shapps argued Boris Johnson's father was within his right to travel abroad. "

 

"Mr Shapps said: "When you say restrictions, he will have ignored travel advice, not restrictions."

 

"Mr Shapps continued: "It's advice, everyone can decide what to do with the advice.""

 

Johnson jnr:

"“The advice says you have to to make your own decision about whether you want to travel,” he said in reference to the Foreign Office advice against all but essential international travel."

 

 

Surely  cjregg read that?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1304498/grant-shapps-travel-advice-stanley-johnson-boris-coronavirus

 

 

more?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=shapps+stanley+advice&t=ffsb&ia=web

Edited by tobyjugg2

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Its official: Boris 'The Liar' Johnsons word is not worth the paper its written on

 

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...