Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi.   What reason/s have they given you for declining please?   HB
    • get the FOS done and see. i have a feeling you might not need to do the latter.    
    • Noted, thanks re-draft it is then 🙄    If it does go to FOS and its upheld can I also go for the throat and apply to set aside the suspended judgement (consent order) based  CCA  sections 86E not providing default sum notices 86(5) not entitled to enforce agreement  87(1) and 88(2) leading to unlawful repudiation of the credit agreement. Just an idea. 
    • CB ....this conclusion is true.   as for PB, i can assure you that user most probably ( well i know but shouldn't say} holds the record here for the most reported posts by users as well as from those of the site team concerning his posts. if you hold on someones username further info can be seen.   however , a bit like say vodaphone or virgin media , very large companies with millions of customers will get the most complaints made against them...and that equates to posting levels here too. as for 'royalties account holder' that again merely points, by a default label in the software package we use, to the number of posts made.   one could further this by noting were we to agree with all their posts they would be on the siteteam... i will leave you to understand why not .....       don't think anyone did?    regards  DX
    • Is it just that? Oh I thought it was because of all the effort he and others made to rightly bring DCBL to court. But he just got lucky there I suppose. Lucky he didn't bring his complaint to this forum first because if he had of done, he'd be £10K poorer right now. And for something that Peterbard describes as benefitting from being newsworthy, I am struggling to find all the news reports that refer to it.       Confucius  say "he who backpedals, falls off bike."    I'm not surprised in the least that you, a gold account holder on this forum, would adopt a dismissive attitude to this well deserved victory in court against DCBL, however I'm curious as to why you opted to reduce the issues at stake to being 'simply' about ' the EA fell foul of the regulation which defines "relevant premises".   That certainly wasn't any argument that Iain Gould furthered and he's a civil actions lawyer whom, dare I say it, know a hell of a lot more about trespass and misuse of private information than you do.   The judge never mentioned "relevant premises" either. Not during the hearing or in his judgement. And you never mentioned it either prior to know. In fact, in the original  in the original 2018 thread you even went so far as to suggest that whatever address was on the writ was irrelevant because, "interestingly, if the address is not  a requirement it would not be possible to sue the bailiff for wrong attendance under section 66."   Not that your wrongfully held opinion that non debtors are also subject to the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 matters, because as I had already pointed out in the first video because the claimant wasn't suing for wrong attendance under section 66.   He sued for trespass. Part 66 never applied to him because he was not the debtor and never had been. You and the likes of DCBL can disregard that obvious point as much as you like, but bailiffs do not have a blanket immunity from trespass.   Have a look at the article Iain Gould has written on his blog about the case. It might help you understand the tort of trespass in some small way, and might help you adopt a more balanced approach to those poor sods who owed no debt and have had their homes raided and their privacy breached by EAs, and then - to add insult to injury - they come to you looking for help.   What makes it worse is that your defective understanding of when an Enforcement Agents action can give rise to trespass is backed up by your site team members who think it's their job to echo your mistakes not by justifying what you say - because they can't - but by making defamatory remarks at the expense of those who give the 'correct advice'.   Unlike you and your team members I don't hide behind the protection of anonymity. Nobody can hold you to account if you get it wrong, or heaven forbid, if it turns out you  have been working for a firm of debt collectors all along. To add to this, you don't seem to care much about removing libellous remarks from your forum when a legitimate complaint is raised.   To respond to Bank Fodders comment that "At some point in the video it has screenshots of this forum and the narrative suggests that some people agree that an enforcement agent has the power to enter into a property to check on identity. I think that it is intended that the CAG is associated with this belief."   Seriously? I have to point it out to you.   Maybe it has something to do with key members of this forum smearing me on the original thread by saying how wrong my narrative was and then implying I was a Freeman of the Land.   Maybe it had something to do with Gold Member Peter Bard leaving this comment on the same thread that stated:   "The point I was trying to make is that the EA will not be as interested in paperwork as in physical proof that the debtor does or does not live there.   As said there is no requirement for an address on a warrant, in fact the debtor may live at several addresses and the bailiff may attend to serve at any of them. The warrant is against the debtor, not the debtor at an address. It requires only enough info to identify the person.( see CPR wherever it is).   The bailiff will be much more interested in getting in and checking for clothes in wardrobes, sleeping accommodation, letters etc."   I'm sorry if that wasn't enough for you to justify me bringing that point up in the video. I did consider coming here before I completed it and asking those members if they intended to maintain their position that the Enforcement Agent had acted within the law but strangely the forum account I had used to make my first and only posting on this forum in 2018 - to counter the smears - would not allow me to sign in.   Far be it from me to draw any conclusions about my input not being welcome here, I figured Peterbard and some of the key members here would use their creative skills at providing a blanket immunity from civil liability for all EAs by misinterpreting key legislation in their behalf.    It looks like I was right about that also. Unfortunately I have given in to temptation, and am choosing to respond, even though I know how utterly futile it is.
  • 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
      • 5 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

yes we need to know that.

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 1.5k
  • 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

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

A Dalek enforcing strict quarantining on a neighbourhood. You can't get more British than this   https://tinyurl.com/uzox4hy

Posted Images

1 hour ago, hightail said:

Quick question.  If you're tested where is that result registered?  Is it at the location of the test or your private address?

 

I would assume any UK based tests would be primarily logged against your NHS record, but a good question

 

 

(90 minute) Covid-19 lab set-up at Thailand's Suvarnabhumi Airport

 

https://www.thestar.com.my/aseanplus/aseanplus-news/2020/07/06/covid-19-lab-set-up-at-thailand039s-suvarnabhumi-airport

 

 

New AI test identifies COVID-19 within one hour in emergency departments

(but read the detail)

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/science-blog/new-ai-test-identifies-covid-19-within-one-hour-emergency-departments

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.07.20148361v1

 

 

 

Indian startup develops Covid 19 detecting mobile app, takes 5 minutes

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/indian-startup-develops-covid-19-detecting-mobile-app-takes-5-minutes/story-pB69DtRslPDJkx3tF1gOdN.html

 

 

 

 

I've not looked at much in detail apart from a summary read through the ox.ac one

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

So much fails to add up with Test & trace for sure

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

BN, you might find this article interesting. Prof Allyson Pollock is a member of Independent Sage and I think what she's written is enlightening. Depressing though and it would be nice to think it could change.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/31/outsourcing-england-test-trace-nhs-private

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the usual suspects Serco, G4S should have funder Local Authority Public Health teams and set up NHS test labs for those LA teams to process tests.

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

sums it up

 

"We all know that an effective and integrated find, test, track and trace system is hugely important in tackling the coronavirus outbreak. It’s crucial if we’re going to come out of lockdown safely, prevent a second wave of suffering and see our loved ones again.

Yet Britain’s test and trace programme – lauded by the government as “world-beating” – is about as far from integrated or effective as you can get."

 

"Instead of putting local public health experts and NHS services in charge of contact tracing, the health secretary, Matt Hancock, handed over responsibility to private companies such as the outsourcing giant Serco, which has previously been fined for deaths of workers and members of the public that could have been prevented. The list of problems in the test and trace system is already immense – three data breaches, poor training and faulty online administration systems among them."

 

 

and who IS delivering?

"Despite this convoluted mess of a setup, local health protection teams are delivering.

In public hands, teams are tracing far more contacts than the privatised national call centres and online system. They are achieving this even in the face of local public health departments being hampered by lack of access to real-time data on cases in their communities."

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
4 hours ago, hightail said:

Quick question.  If you're tested where is that result registered?  Is it at the location of the test or your private address?

 

It goes to whoever commissioned the test, at least at least it has for the 4 tests I've had. Only one of the results was registered on my online medical records though.

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

It goes to whoever commissioned the test, at least at least it has for the 4 tests I've had. Only one of the results was registered on my online medical records though.

OK, got that.  I guess what I'm interested in is whether you hit the stats as either +ve or -ve in your home area, where you work, where you're tested - or even all of the above.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, hightail said:

OK, got that.  I guess what I'm interested in is whether you hit the stats as either +ve or -ve in your home area, where you work, where you're tested - or even all of the above.

 

Not sure what you mean by +ve or -ve?

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

Not sure what you mean by +ve or -ve?

The result - presumably the result of a test is either positive or negative.  Should I have added the possibility of inconclusive for completeness?  I didn’t think that would matter so much for how the stats work, whether results are counted more than once.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, hightail said:

The result - presumably the result of a test is either positive or negative.  Should I have added the possibility of inconclusive for completeness?  I didn’t think that would matter so much for how the stats work, whether results are counted more than once.

 

 

 

I don't really know but as all my tests were negative I doubt they would need the data down to where you lived etc but I'm sure they counted the tests and results in the overall stats. Having said that 2 of the tests were at NHS hospitals and the other 2 were done at a private hospital so I'm not sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

Four Covid tests is a lot, CJ, is there a reason for that? I don't know anyone who's had one.

 

I've had several procedures recently as an inpatient. They won't let you in a ward without a negative test result. In fact I've got to have a CT scan at London Bridge hospital as an outpatient and I need a covid test for that, but at least they do it then & there and the result is immediate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-testing-privacy-information/testing-for-coronavirus-privacy-information-quick-read

 

https://www.euronews.com/2020/08/03/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-uk-s-new-90-minute-coronavirus-test-euronews-answers

  • Thanks 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
11 hours ago, cjcregg said:

don't really know but as all my tests were negative I doubt they would need the data down to where you lived

Surely it does matter for deciding on the need for local restrictions if people are tested outside the area they live.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

‘Flabbergasted’ motorist handed parking fine after taking drive-through coronavirus test

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-drive-through-test-parking-fine-enfield-a9652391.html

 

Mr Pugh said he was at the testing site with his wife and two children, aged nine and 11, for all of 23 minutes. He followed the directions of the staff during his time there.

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
10 minutes ago, hightail said:

Surely it does matter for deciding on the need for local restrictions if people are tested outside the area they live.  

 

The need for local restrictions would be based on the number of positive tests, not negative. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

probably, but % of population infected could/should also be considered, and of course any identified  source

 

eg a sudden increase of 100 confirmed cases in a small village vs a 100 blip in the cases in london after a rave

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
1 hour ago, tobyjugg2 said:

‘Flabbergasted’ motorist handed parking fine after taking drive-through coronavirus test

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-drive-through-test-parking-fine-enfield-a9652391.html

 

Mr Pugh said he was at the testing site with his wife and two children, aged nine and 11, for all of 23 minutes. He followed the directions of the staff during his time there.

Ah another rapacious PPC  Highview Parking issuing invoices  for using the car park, if he was in a queue, he was not parked, its NOT a FINE,  perhaps Highview need to be told any ANPR they are using isn't suitable for people waiting in a queue, for legitimate NHS purposes.

 

"I didn’t even leave the car the whole time I was there.”

 

If Highview did try Court on any of this type of Invoice and  Mr Pugh is unlikely to be the only one affected as thHighviews response to the Indy was  

 

"A spokesperson for Highview Parking said any PCNs issued “incorrectly” would be cancelled, adding that on 7 July, the company were only notified the site was used for coronavirus testing “more than a week later

 

 If someone doesn't complain or they appeal, don't think Highview would  allow all invoices to be killed off they might try court on some the recent OPS case in Lewes CC would get them in hot water and a defeat in a defended claim. Other cases have shown that  a queue to get out isn't Parking so queuing for a test isn't either .

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
1 hour ago, tobyjugg2 said:

probably, but % of population infected could/should also be considered, and of course any identified  source

 

eg a sudden increase of 100 confirmed cases in a small village vs a 100 blip in the cases in london after a rave

 

That's the sort of thing I was interested in.  Figures are reported for the area covered by my district council but there are no hospitals or testing centres.   If home address isn't what matters this could lead to a rather ridiculous situation where there are no cases but there are deaths.  There are loads of people within the district work for the NHS at large hospitals outwith the area for at least two different hospital trusts.  When they're tested does the result (+ve or -ve because both do matter) count for those cities or for their home address?  Is it recorded against both - if so does that count as two tests?

 

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

 

That's the sort of thing I was interested in.  Figures are reported for the area covered by my district council but there are no hospitals or testing centres.   If home address isn't what matters this could lead to a rather ridiculous situation where there are no cases but there are deaths.  There are loads of people within the district work for the NHS at large hospitals outwith the area for at least two different hospital trusts.  When they're tested does the result (+ve or -ve because both do matter) count for those cities or for their home address?  Is it recorded against both - if so does that count as two tests?

 

 

 

I've done some checking on what actually happens with the result with people who have been for tests - a number of NHS staff (plus some neighbours)

 

First

The competence of the drive in test centers would appear to be shockingly poor, with

a number of lost results and multiple 11 day plus waits for results even in this small sample

Two swaps being taken (rather than one) with two test results coming back with conflicting results (let alone results saying inconclusive or other things other than positive or negative

 

 

and, despite the assurances on the ICO site, and by the gov site, even people who have had multiple tests - there is nothing on their medical records - so where the data is going - ??

 

Small sample of 11 so far with 6 who have had multiple tests

 

A small minority of the tests went smoothly with fast results - including mine.

 

 

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...