Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are 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. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as 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. 9. 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.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

CRS AJJB chasing money for Photo Studio Group run by Michael John Hannah


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1226 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

Please

Start your own new thread

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

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I took my 14 year old daughter to a no obligation studio photo shoot after she replied to an online ad for potentital models to send in a selfie.

 

My daughter was told that she was selected out of thousands of applicants and had won a place to attend the photo shoot at "Hype Digital" studios in Birmingham but I would have to pay a £50 deposit to secure the palce. A I paid the deposit on my credit card.

You you you

 

The photoshoot took about 4 hours with my daughter expected to change in between shots behind a flimsy curtain in the same room as hair and makeup was being done and other people were waiting. It all looked a  bit makeshift as though the studio had been hired for the day. You are you you you you you you you are

 

After the photo shoot we were taken into a side room to get the results. We were given the impression that Emma (my daughter) had passed the test and she could now become a top model but I would need to purchase one of their portfolio products to progress her modelling career otherwise the photos would be deleted.
The product was £2000 which I could not afford but my daughter was getting upset to think the photos might be deleted. They said I could not change my mind or cancel the order later. I was pressurised into making a decision there and then.

 

When I said I couldn't afford it they said I could pay £200 deposit on my credit card and setup £218 per month direct debits from the same card.
There were no affordability checks made to assess my ability to pay. The salesman said we would have model agencies contacting us to discuss any potential modelling work that Emma could do.

After a couple of months we had no contact from anybody so I tried to get hold of the studio but couldn't get through after several attempts. Eventually I did get through to someone who said I would have to setup an appointment for someone to call me back. I waited by the phone at the appointment time but nobody called. I then researched the company and a large number of people were saying it was a scam and not to pay them anything. I submitted a dispute to the credit card company stating my suspicions that it was a scam.
They refunded the following 2 months direct debit payments to my credit card and cancelled the direct debit. They said the merchant did not contest the chargebacks so I thought the contract would be cancelled as I had won the dispute. 

From the 6th Sept 2020 I have been getting demands for payment by text and email from a debt collection agency called CRS (Credit Resource Solutions) demanding a payment of the balance of my account to the Photo Studio Group for £864.
Now this has been elevated to a law firm called AJJB Law threatening legal action if I don't pay saying the next stage will be to add costs to the balance. 

The Photo Studio Group  is run by Michael John Hannah who used to run Kube Studios which has appeared on BBC Watchdog for exactly the same scam.   
You This is a link to the Watchdog report https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2DJ6GCxl7JWHd08jZMb4kSG/kube-studios

 

I emailed AJJB Law with a "prove it" letter demading they prove that I owe the money by sending the signed contract and any related documents.  They have now put the action on hold for 30 days whilst they request the documents from their client.
They said the next stage will be to add costs to the debt. 

 I have reported this scam to Action Fraud and to BBC Watchdog and I have started a section 75 claim with the credit card company to get back the 3 intiial direct debit payments. I also got the credit card company to send me a letter stating the dispute I made was upheld and the 2 chargeback amounts were not contested by the merchant.

I am worried they might add £100's to the debt in costs and get a court to issue a CCJ against me. I have never received the photos or portfolio or had any contact from modelling agencies as they promised. 

 I was wondering if I should pay the debt on the credit card to get them off my back and then try to get it refunded through the section 75 claim?

Edited by BankFodder
Restructured to make it intelligible
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your posting your new thread here. However you've posted a very long story in a pretty well completely solid block of text which is very difficult for people to read on screen. To get the help that you need, we need stories posted properly spaced and punctuated.

I'm going to restructure it – but please will you present it in a more manageable way in future

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore them. If you want to write something to them then tell them to bring it on and to start a court claim because you will be very happy to expose it all in court, to demand papers and evidence and also that the press and TV journalists are already interested.

Tell them that you simply can't wait and they should hurry up.

Other than that, do nothing. Stop worrying, and be a little bit more careful about checking things out before you start spending your money. Make sure that your daughter knows all about it so that she will grow up with a little bit of wisdom.

As you realise, you are being completely scammed and these debt collection companies – which share the same address – are simply just part of the operation. They may have other legitimate interests – I don't know – but in terms of this glamour photo shoot business, you should completely ignore them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • BankFodder changed the title to CRS /AJJB you Law you legal action after I stopped paying for scam studio photoshoot when

Do not pay any money to try and get them off your back. Keep on clawing your money back as well as you can. You seem to be doing pretty well so far.

You are lucky that you didn't pay by bank transfer – as most people do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • BankFodder changed the title to CRS AJJB chasing money for scam Photo Studio Group run by Michael John Hannah

Michael John HANNAH

 

Quote

Total number of appointments 3

Date of birth May 1973

CARLTON NASH & CO LIMITED (12267941)

Company status Active
Correspondence address
45-47, Thomas Street, Manchester, England, M4 1NA
Role ACTIVE Director
Appointed on 17 October 2019
Nationality British
Country of residence United Kingdom
Occupation Company Director

MY WATER IS PURE LIMITED (09034157)

Company status Dissolved
Correspondence address Farrow Accounting And Tax Limited, 94-95, South Worple Way, London, United Kingdom, SW14 8ND
Role Director
Appointed on 12 May 2014
Nationality British
Country of residence United Kingdom
Occupation Director

THE PHOTO STUDIO GROUP LIMITED (08043958)

Company status Active
Correspondence address
Farrow Accounting & Tax Limited, 95 South Worple Way, London, England, SW14 8ND
Role ACTIVE Director
Appointed on 24 April 2012
Nationality British
Country of residence United Kingdom
Occupation Director

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • BankFodder changed the title to CRS AJJB chasing money for Photo Studio Group run by Michael John Hannah

I would deal with this the same as I deal with the Parking People. 

 

1. Get stroppy - fight for your money back.

2. Tell the debt collectors - this is harassment - and charge them £196 every time they write to you.

3. Court action for the return of your funds.

 

Or write off what you've paid and accept the lesson on the chin - but maintain the issue with the debt collectors if they pursue. 

 

These people are utter [Insert Your Own Words Here]

 

Richard (Nobby) 

 

PS Oh and edit the post to put some space in the post if you can. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It also states at the bottom of the  Companies House web page that The Photo Studio Group Limited previous company name was Kube Studios Limited, the subject of the BBC Watchdog investigation   https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/08043958 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/2DJ6GCxl7JWHd08jZMb4kSG/kube-studios

Link to post
Share on other sites

How on earth do you come up with the figure of £196 pounds???

 

Anyhow, as you have found out these are charlatans, reclaim your money and simply ignore them, although a complaint to trading standards is a good idea also.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately trading standards will take absolutely no notice whatsoever. It might be worth contacting action fraud and get a crime reference number – and also maybe it will help to build up a bit of intelligence against these people – although fundamentally action fraud is pretty well useless as well. But better make a report than no report

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes I forget TS is pointless, AF may well be worth a shot like you say.

 

Or Rip off Britain!?

 

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent AJJb Law a "prove it" letter so they have to send me all documentation to prove I owe the debt, e.g. copy of the signed contract, payment plan, statement of account etc.

 

They said they would put the action on hold for 30 days whilst they request the information from their client.

That was a couple of weeks ago and I haven't heard back from them yet.

 

latest threats was sent By text message 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and who told you to enter into pointless letter tennis??

 

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

I got the advice from the Which legal team saying if debt collectors are chasing you for money they firstly have to prove you owe the debt or they must stop harassing you and there is a template for a "prove it" letter on the Which web site.

 

The problem is that it might be a scam and people are saying to ignore the debt collectors, but the Photo Studio Group is a legitimate company and I signed what I thought was a legally binding contract.

 

The Which legal team want to see the contract if they send it to find out if it is legally binding.

 

What I can't seem to find out is if these scam photo studio companies have ever actually taken anyone to court, and if so, have they been successful?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if the contract appears to be binding - that doesn't necessarily mean that it is all above board.

 

With all respect to the Which team, their advice is generally a bit luke-warm and sheltered.

 

Let us see the contract as well - if and when you get it.

 

Also even though there appears to be a contract, it doesn't mean that they will honour it and it certainly doesn't mean that they would be prepared to expose themselves in court in order to try to enforce it. 

 

"Binding contracts" may often be useful to frighten people into pay up

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, simond1000 said:

I got the advice from the Which legal team saying if debt collectors are chasing you for money they firstly have to prove you owe the debt or they must stop harassing you and there is a template for a "prove it" letter on the Which web site

 

god which want shooting for the stupid far reaching statement.

only the OWNER of a debt can issue legal proceedings!!

 

IF the DCA letters say 'our client'

thus they DON'T own the debt

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

as DCA's always are...all hot air on any debt.

they have no special nor any different legal powers to you or i 

should we think someone owes us money..

 

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... 

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

CRS has just sent me the contract I signed before they commence  legal action.

 

I have attached the contract with my personal information blanked out.

I don't remember signing all the sub clauses but I must have done as I just wanted to get out of there after the hard sell routine.

 

I think this contract was mis-sold as I was given misleading information and no cooling off period.

Do I have a leg to stand on if they take me to court?

 

 

contract.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

You haven't really given us a timeline, but I understand that in October 2019 – one year ago, you visited the studios for a photo shoot for your daughter.

  • You told us that the deal was that they would take photographs and then if everything went well and the photographs are good, they would then try to find modelling opportunities for your daughter.
  • Because you didn't want to upset your daughter, you agree to an instalment/loan contract.
  • At the time of signing the agreement, the salesman told you to expect to be contacted by modelling agencies with offers of work for your daughter.
  • You didn't hear from the company for a couple of months – so that would take us to, say, January 2020.
  • You attempted several times to get hold of the company – and eventually did and they promised you a call back.
  • You only Nobody called you back.
  • He then decided to do some research and you discovered that you are probably being scammed.
  • You then canceled your direct debit and also asked for some chargebacks which succeeded.
  • Nothing more was heard until September of this year when you started being chased by a debt collector. 

 

Looking through the contract you posted up, they tend to make it very clear throughout the contract that the agreement is only for the photographs. Not for any references or for promises of modelling work or for any representations on your behalf.


They apparently took 20 photographs and charge you £2000 for them which is £100 per photo. A nice little earner!

Please can you confirm that my resumé of the situation is correct

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

posts moved to your existing thread

 

dx

 

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

I  think they have broken the  Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 specifically two banned pracices :-

 

The list of banned practices includes the following: 

 

  • Limited offers   Falsely stating that a product will only be available for a very limited time, or that it will only be available on particular terms for a very limited time, in order to elicit an immediate decision and deprive consumers of sufficient opportunity or time to make an informed choice.
  • Pressure selling   Creating the impression that the consumer cannot leave the premises until a contract is formed.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you show us where those things have happened and your evidence for them having happened please.

Also, you say that they told you that your daughter had been selected out of thousands of applicants. Do you have evidence for them having said that? Please can you post it up here

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...