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

Talk Talk Mistake - I'm Paying For It!


Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

On 26th May this year I called my broadband/phone service provider, Talk Talk, to inform them that I would be leaving them and moving to BT at the end of the month. 

My contract with Talk Talk had officially ended back in October 2019 and I was just paying them on a monthly basis for continued service.

 

I was advised that I did not need to do anything, as arrangements would be made on my behalf to keep my existing number etc between Talk Talk and BT. 

I began my contract with BT on 1st June. 

I cancelled my bank payment arrangements to Talk Talk and set up new ones for BT.

 

I then received a bill from Talk Talk for June's monthly charges, which I ignored as I was no longer a customer, I owed them nothing, and they were not providing me with any kind of service.

 

I then received a second bill from Talk Talk for July's monthly charges.

I called Talk Talk to explain their error but they insisted that I was still a customer using their services. 

This was despite me proving that I have been a BT customer for the past two months and paying BT for services that Talk Talk are claiming to be theirs.

 

Talk Talk then took £60.39 from my bank account on 2nd August, despite having no authority or consent from me to do so. 

I complained to my bank and they explained that utility companies hold on to customers payment details (despite GDPR) and this practice is common. 

I have now instructed my bank to refuse any further payments to Talk Talk, by any means!.

 

I phoned Talk Talk to complain and insist they repaid my money immediately as it had been obtained fraudulently and they are not providing any service to me anymore.  The adviser couldn't help much, but promised me a call from a manager later in the week.  The call never materialised.

 

I called Talk Talk myself today, and after nearly four hours of phone calls, being put on hold, transferred, being made promises and making more calls, I have got nowhere. One manager did offer a token £30 payment which I obviously turned down. 

33I eventually hung up after being put on hold for over 20 minutes during a call lasting over an hour.

 

These people are ignorant at best and impossible to deal with.

Please could someone advise me on how to get my £60.39 back from these people?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

On the basis it was a direct debit from the bank. Why did you not use the DD guarantee and insist the bank refunds the money. 
 

 

Edited by CraigMcK
Typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

All Talk Talk Direct debits/standing orders, etc were all cancelled correctly and set up for BT.

Talk Talk took the money from my debit card details which they had retained.

I have now blocked this too. I just want my money back!

Link to post
Share on other sites

its called continuous payment authority

which both your bank and TT should know about!!

 

simply ask you bank for a chargeback

they should not refuse you.

 

then also get them to cancel the CPA too.

 

 

 

 

 

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

eh?

no valid contract!

 

is the BT coming out the same bank AC?
 

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

Only asking because I want to get my facts right before I approach the bank!

Yes, BT is coming out of the same account.

Link to post
Share on other sites

then there is your proof to them

why would you pay for BB twice!!

 

for my notes:

GENERAL NOTES ON CHARGEBACK & Continuous Payment Authority & BACS 
 .....
 We have been telling people to put a letter into their bank instructing them 
not to make any payments under any circumstances to these companies
 .
http://whatconsumer.co.uk/visa-debit-chargeback/- it works!
usually this should be done using the number on your debit card
 .
 banks MUST follow written intructions from their customers !
.
CANCELLING YOUR DEBIT CARD DOES NOT STOP CPA'S
 .
 This fsa guide has now been updated:
 .
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/pubs/consumer_info/know_your_rights_guide.pdf
http://www.fca.org.uk/news/continuous-payment-authorities-your-right-to-cancel
https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/unauthorised-payments-account
 .
 Here's the text:
 .
 Cancelling a regular
 card payment:
 .
 When you give your credit or debit card details to a company and authorise them to take regular payments from your account, 
 such as for a gym membership or magazine subscription,
 it is known as a ‘recurring transaction’ or ‘continuous payment authority’.
 .
These are often confused with direct debits, but do not offer the same guarantee if the amount or date of the payment changes.
 .
 In most cases, regular payments can be cancelled by telling the company taking the payments. 
 .
 However, 
 you have the right to cancel them directly with your bank or card issuer by telling it that you have stopped permission for the payments. 
 Your bank or card issuer must then stop them – it has no right to insist that you agree this first with the company taking the payments.
 .
 Be aware, though, that you will still be responsible for paying any money that you owe.
and that CANCELLING YOUR CARD WILL NOT STOP THE CPA
 .
 ..
 .
 New june 2013
 .
 Regulator orders Banks and mutuals to review complaints about not cancelling recurring payments from November 2009.
 .
 Consumers who have set up a regular payment from their account will now be able to successfully cancel that arrangement 
 by contacting their card provider, the Financial Conduct Authority said.
 .
 The FCA has been examining how easy it is for customers to cancel Continuous Payment Authorities (CPAs) 
 due either to payday lendersicon or for other regular payments such as subscriptions or gymicon memberships.
 .
 CPAs, which are also commonly called recurring transactions or recurring payments, 
 are relatively easy to set up but can be hard to cancel, causing problems for consumers trying to manage their finances,the FCA said.
 .
 Now, following the FCA review of how the largest high street banks and mutuals process requests to cancel CPAs, they have agreed that they will ensure that when 
 a customer asks for a recurring payment to end, that will be sufficient to cancel the arrangement. They have also confirmed that should a payment go through by 
 mistake following cancellation by a customer the customer will be refunded immediately.
 .
 In addition to securing this commitment, the largest banks and mutuals have agreed to review every individual complaint they have received about the non-
 cancellation of a CPA and to pay redress where payments have continued to be made despite the customer cancelling the arrangement. This applies to all complaints 
 since November 2009 when the Financial Services Authority, the FCA’s predecessor, began regulating banking conduct.
 .
 Clive Adamson, the FCA’s director of supervision, said: “It’s important that consumers are confident that banks are meeting their everyday banking needs. Today 
 customers can be confident that when they ask for a Continuous Payment Authority to be cancelled – it will be cancelled - and that it can be done easily. 
 .
“We recognise that historically this is an area where some customers have struggled but the banks and mutuals have responded positively to our work on this issue. 
 From now on we expect them to be getting this right. In addition, they have committed to review past complaints.”
.
 .
 Also mentioned your displeasure that as whomever took your money had obviously attempted this many times 
 probably activating your banks own anti fraud software - nobody had the decency to inform my you this was going on.?

.
 .In the FSA's own words:
 .
 ..
 What should I do about a payment from my account that I didn’t authorise?
 .
 Your bank must refund an unauthorised transaction. 
 Money can only be taken from your account if you have authorised the transaction 
 or if your bank can prove you were at fault – 
.
see below.
 Contact your bank immediately if you notice an unauthorised payment from your account.
.
 If you are sure you did not authorise the payment, you can claim a refund. 
.
 However, your bank does not have to refund you if you do not tell it about the payment until 13 months
 or more after the date it left your account.
 .
 Your bank must refund an unauthorised transaction
 .
 ------------------
 .
 Your bank may only refuse a refund for an unauthorised transaction if:
 .
 ? it can prove you authorised the transaction 
– though your bank cannot simply say that use of your password, 
 card and PIN proves you authorised a payment; or
.
 ? it can prove you are at fault because you acted fraudulently, 
 or because you deliberately, 
 or with gross negligence, failed to protect the details of your card, PIN or password in a way that allowed the transaction
 .
 -----------------------
 .
 How quickly must my bank refund me for an unauthorised transaction?
 .
 The bank must make the refund immediately unless it has evidence that one of the above reasons applies. 

 Your bank may ask you to answer some questions and fill out a form confirming what has happened, 
 but it cannot delay your refund while it waits for you to return the form.

 If the bank has evidence that one of the above reasons for refusing a refund applies, 
 it may investigate before making a refund 
 but must look into it as quickly as possible. 

 If your bank rejects your claim for a refund it should explain why.
 If the transaction was on a credit card, the refund may not happen immediately. 

 But the card issuer cannot charge interest or ask for repayment of the amount unless it can prove you are liable to pay
 


 

 

 

  • Like 1

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
  • 3 weeks later...

Many thanks for the advice above dx100uk . I have followed your advice and the chargeback is currently in the hands of my bank (paperwork sent back to them last wednesday).

 

Cheers!

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...