Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • @BankFodder i have tweaked this  ever so slightly - good to go?
    • As a Canadian / Brit nationality, after witnessing Quebec separation referendum number 2 in November 1995, I can honestly say that indyref 2is a massive gamble for the SNP. There was a huge movement towards a 'free Quebec' in the early 90's which let to a sense of bullish confidence that Parti Quebecois would finally get their idealistic way on attempt number 2 and wrench Quebec away from Greater Canada. Turned out that on the day of their precious referendum, a few thousand more people voted against separation. it was 0.1%.     Cue shrill accusations of fraud and , lots of anti semitism, the Jewish Community in Montreal, got their vote out on this one, along with other ethnic minorities. But in historical context it was the end of the Quebec  nation dream. Sure there were some death throes, but looking at my second home of Quebec now, millenials couldn't care a flying walrus.     What I'm saying is, by all means have a second referendum, but if independence loses, it's gone for ever!
    • correct zero anyone can do, stop using the phone too, they will LIE.   now this 'supporting your gym'...do you mean you purposefully chose to pay in all the months whereby covid closed them down?    
    • Well it sounds to me as if you already have an independent report provided by the manufacturer.   The fact JL refuse to share their report is unusual and you may wish to refer to this when writing to them, considering at this stage both parties are acting in good faith it would be very strange for JL to refuse to share evidence that may prevent un-necessary court action.   This will be confirmed if JL continue to refuse to disclose the report after sending them a letter of claim.   Assuming JL are in fact in receipt of a report outlining what they claim then the fact you are in receipt of a report from the manufacturer would appear to trump theirs.   However to be absolutely certain I would seek a second quote for repair from another independent repair shop asking them to include as much detail in the quote as to the cause of the fault. That way in the unlikely event that your report from the manufacturer is deemed less expert than the one obtained by JL you are now in receipt of multiple professional opinions re-enforcing your position.   I would also be grateful to confirm whether it is JL or the repair report provided to JL that indicates the repair is not possible due to the TV no longer being manufactured.   Why this is important is because if the repair report indicates this is the reason the TV cannot be repaired you are in receipt of very clear evidence from the manufacturer that the TV can infact be repaired and this would move to undermine the accuracy of JL's report,  decreasing the likelihood of their report to be sucessful in evidence.
  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 32 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

Quickquid and incorrect information to CRA's

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 385 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

Hello everybody,


Back in 2014 I took out a loan with Quickquid for £150 which was defaulted in June 2015,

after this debt was passed around various DCA's (despite Quickquid denying otherwise)

all went quiet and I never heard anything else


a month or so ago I started to receive e-mails out of the blue from their collections department advising me that my account was 60 days overdue (it's way more then 60 days) and that a Default Notice will be sent to my address (they already did this back in June 2015).


today I received a e-mail from Credit Karma that a new address has been registered on my credit file by......Quickquid,

on checking my credit file with Credit Karma an address in Ross-on-Wye has been registered by Quickquid since the 1st April 2020,

I have no knowledge or have anything to do with this address and neither have I every visited the town in question and I have been at my present address since 1990.


I have sent Quickquid a e-mail asking why they have registered a incorrect address on my credit file all of a sudden and I have also raised a dispute with Transunion.


Should the next step be informing the ICO that Quickquid has registered incorrect information on my credit file?.


Any help/advise will be much appreciated,


Stay Safe everybody.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to raise a formal complaint with them - But also theyve gone into Administration. 

Raising a dispute with TU is a good idea but they may rebuke it and tell you to contact the company. 




We could do with some help from you.


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group



Receptaculum Ignis


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

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...