Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The reason that I have indicated that it is the seller who should bring an action against Hermes is not because they are the seller – but because they are the person who suffered the loss. If you haven't suffered a loss then you probably don't have the status – locus standi – to bring a court action. Of course there is a slight problem that you didn't enter into the contract with Hermes – the purchaser did. Until 1999 this would have been a problem and would have prevented you from bringing any kind of action at all – at least on the basis of contract. However, since 1999, the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act gives the beneficiary of any contract full third party rights as if they were a contracting party. The only exception to this is that if the contract specifically excluded non-contracting parties – and I'm not aware that Hermes has yet amended their contract to try and prevent this. Of course as usual, Hermes will make a big point about the fact that no insurance was purchased. Hopefully you have been reading around the threads on this sub- forum and you have seen that our view is that it is completely unfair and in fact it is absurd to require a customer to pay money to protect Hermes or any other service provider from the consequences of their own negligence or the criminality of their own employees. Every time this point has been raised with Hermes in mediation, Hermes have settled and we consider that it is because they want to avoid going to court to get a definitive judgement that their insurance scam – is precisely that – a scam. On the basis of what I understand here, this is more than just negligence there is criminality and your bike has been stolen. You've already begun a complaint and you have been knocked back and so I think there's no point in mucking around and I think that you should simply issue a letter of claim to Hermes giving them 14 days to settle in full or else you will begin a court action. Make sure that you have read around the forum about taking a small claim in the County Court. It's very easy but you need to be aware of the steps. If you send the letter of claim, then don't expect that they are suddenly going to refund you your money. They won't. They will force you to issue the court papers and who will then force you to pay the hearing fee. At this point, they will opt for mediation and they will try to knock you down and get your compromise in your claim. You should stand your ground and refused to compromise even a single penny. We will help you all the way. You seem to be a seller and a purchaser here who are getting on very well together and so as you are motivated by a common purpose, you may want to get an agreement where you decide to share the fees of court action – which won't be very much. I haven't checked the court fees for this value claim – but I expect that the whole thing will be only about £120. Of course you will get that back when you win – but bear in mind there is a is a slight risk factor and that means that £120 would be the extent of your risk and would be the maximum that you would lose. It is inconceivable that you would lose. You should be claiming the cost of the bike, the cost of delivery, plus interest which is presently 8% – a very good rate in today's economic climate. Of course you will also claim back your court fees. If you want to proceed then please let us know and let us know also that you have read around the stories and also the steps involved taking a small claim in the County Court and that you understand what you are doing. If you do your basic reading over the next couple of days then we can help you draft a letter of claim on Sunday and you can send it off on Monday. I would recommend that you post your draft letter of claim on this forum so we can check it. Keep it short and to the point.
    • That's what keeps divorce lawyers and mediators in work, I suppose. You think he's being unreasonable and he thinks you are.   My gut feeling is that it would be better to have this agreed in writing so it can't be challenged later, but that's just my opinion. Here's more information from the CAB in case it covers something you haven't already considered.   HB
    • Biden doesn't seem bothered about negotiating a trade treaty to suit the UK government's timetable. I don't suppose they saw this coming, not that the amount of trade involved makes up for what's being lost with Europe anyway.   https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-boris-johnson-usa-trade-deal-b1807616.html
    • No we haven’t mentioned divorce yet The fair split is I give him half the equity and anything he wants to take from the house  I just feel he is now being unreasonable because I won’t change my mind and take him back 
    • Hi.   Have you spoken to a divorce lawyer or has your husband? Trying to look at this from the outside, it sounds as if it would be better to agree a fair split according to divorce law rather than deciding between you.   Sadly, once money becomes involved things can become more complicated, but I'd have thought a divorce lawyer would be able to advise.   ETA: Here's some advice from the government.   HB
  • Our picks

    • 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
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

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


Recommended Posts

hype digital have a virtual office at Capital Office, Kemp House, 152 - 160 City Road, London, EC1V, 2NX

 

https://hype-digital.co.uk is owned and operated by Thomas Street Studios Limited, 45-47 Thomas Street, Manchester, M4 1NA Co Reg No 04306677

FCA register has no entries for 04306677 nor hype digital.

 

however look who owns thomas street studios

 

https://register.fca.org.uk/s/firm?id=001b00000209FPtAAM

 

and...

 

Social Money Limited

 

https://register.fca.org.uk/s/firm?id=001b000000l7kwxAAA

 

Trading names

CLOSE
 

Current names

Showing 6 records

 
 

Name

Sort by: Name descending

Status

Sort by: Status descending

Effective from

Sort by: Effective from descending
Social Money Limited Registered 04 Mar 2015
Bridging Crowd Trading 04 Mar 2015
Payl8r Trading 04 Mar 2015
SoMo Trading 21 Aug 2020
Somo.co.uk Trading 21 Aug 2020
The Bridging Crown Trading 04 Mar 2015

Previous names

Showing 1 records

 
 

Name

Sort by: Name descending

Status

Sort by: Status descending

Effective from

Sort by: Effective from descending

Effective to

Sort by: Effective to descending
Loan Scanner Trading 04 Mar 2015 21 Aug 2020

 

 

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
  • Replies 102
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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 she

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 th

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:   

Posted Images

The direct debits were cancelled by the credit card company as the agreement was made with my credit card not a bank.

 

The credit card have charged back 2 direct debit payments which were not contested and I have raised a section 75 complaint to get back the rest of the money that had already been paid on my credit card.

 

The photo studio group is threatening to take legal action for what they say is the balance of £863.49 but if you say the agreement is void I have nothing to worry about.

 

Why do you think the agreement is void?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the dca is willy waving not the company you signed the credit agreement with??

 

The photo shoot  contract is totally sep from the CCA finance agreement.

 

Which says under the staple? 

Exact wording please.

 

 

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

This is how they sent it to me so I don't have the original. Should I ask them for it?

 

Do you think I could get this contract recinded because it was built on frauulent misrepresentaion by the studio?

Link to post
Share on other sites

thinking about it 

probably page 2 of that PDf the credit agreement 

probably says 

fixed sum loan agreement

regulated by the ....

 

you are p'haps using word you don't really understand...re things like contract recinded...

 

there are 2 things here

the contract with hype digital

and 

the loan agreement with the photo studio group.

 

and you were most probably unaware that you blindly signed these two things with 2 differing companies .

 

i doubt very much anyone would dare do court , be that hype digital who are the owners of the contract nor any DCA they SELL its value too. at present it's powerless willy waving as the CA dont own it. let that run

 

as for the credit agreement, the whole thing looks dodgy to me and unenforceable esp as it was produced as a result of some known photo scam contract. and as all the platers in this are ultimately owned by the same person..

 

i seriously doubt the currect dca/sols are even aware which they are writing silly letters about really.

 

pers i'd sit on your hands and see if someone is brave enough to issue a letter of claim regarding either.

 

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

:rockon:

 

block and bounce all email addresses 

report texts as spam.

only ever bother IF you get a letter of claim.

 

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
  • 2 weeks later...

I have now been sent an official Letter Before Claim (I have attached the first page with personal info removed, the other pages are just reply forms). I think they are serious about taking me to court now.

 

One other update , Trading Standards are investigating the scam.

Are they allowed to take me court whilst they are being investigated?

What do you think I should do now?

letter before action 1.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes this is part of their MO, it even says so on their website.

 

That contract is ridiculous, and I would say it is unfair as it is clearly skewed in their favour.

 

You cannot cancel the contract UNLESS you pay in full?? Yet they don't keep to their part of the contract by fulfilling it?

 

IMHO you'd wipe the floor with them in court.

https://www.businesscompanion.info/en/quick-guides/on-premises-sales/consumer-contracts-on-premises-sales

 

Information requirements

The Regulations require that you give certain information to consumers who buy goods, services or digital content from you on your business premises. However, there are some types of contract that are exempt from this requirement:

  • medicinal products or services that are either dispensed on prescription or are available free under an NHS arrangement
  • a contract for passenger transport services - for example, bus, rail or flight tickets

In addition, these information requirements do not apply to day-to-day transactions that are performed immediately when the contract is entered into (the consumer pays and gets the goods / services straight away) - for example, for everyday purchases such as groceries, newspapers, buying a coffee to take away, having a shoe-shine, etc. However, other trading standards legislation will still require you to display information about what the product is and its price and, in some cases, its unit price. It is likely that this exception will most likely apply to low cost items.

In all other cases if you are offering to sell goods, services or digital content on your premises you need to give or make available the information listed below to consumers before they enter into any contract:

  • the main characteristics of the goods, services or digital content. In many cases this will be obvious from the display of the goods or their packaging and no further information would need to be added
  • your identity (such as your trading name), geographical address and telephone number. Your name and address may be obvious for customers on your premises but they should also be informed of a telephone number for further contact
  • the total price of the goods, services or digital content, including all taxes - for example, VAT, or, if the price is not known, how the price will be calculated
  • details of any additional delivery charges or, where this cannot be calculated in advance, an indication that a delivery charge will be payable
  • where applicable, arrangements for payment, delivery or performance and the time that you will take to deliver the goods, perform the services or supply the digital content (see 'Time for delivery of goods' below)
  • if you have one, your complaint-handling policy. Providers of services should have a complaint-handling policy in place as required by the Provision of Services Regulations 2009. In addition CTSI approved codes of practice and some trade associations and professional bodies will also require a policy to be in place, which must be made available to consumers
  • if you are selling goods you should remind consumers that the goods you sell must be in conformity with the contract - for example, you might say: 'It is our responsibility to supply you with goods that meet your consumer rights. If you have any concerns that we have not met our legal obligations please contact us'
  • if there are any after-sales services or guarantees available you must make consumers aware of this and any applicable conditions. In many cases this will be obvious from the display of the goods or their packaging and no further information would need to be added
  • if the consumer will be entering into a contract of a fixed duration, they must be informed what this is. If the contract has no fixed length, or can be extended automatically they must be informed of the conditions under which they can terminate it
  • digital content functionality. This includes information about its language, duration, file type, access, updates, tracking, internet connection, geographical restrictions and any additional purchases required
  • digital content compatibility (information regarding both hardware and other software)

The Regulations do not specify how this information has to be made available, the important thing is that consumers have this information given or made available to them. It is likely that this will be achieved by a variety of means, such as the goods themselves, notices or price lists on display, or making a contract available for a consumer to read before they agree to be bound by it. The acid test is that this information must be clear and comprehensible to the consumer before they enter into the contract.

If you need to change any of this information before entering into a contract, or at a later stage, you must agree this with the consumer. Failure to do so will mean that the consumer is not bound by the change of information.

Failure to provide the information set out above would allow a consumer to claim that you have breached your contract with them and seek an appropriate remedy. The consumer would also be able to claim, under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, that you had breached your contract if they found that any of the above information that you had provided was incorrect.

  • Like 1

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

Thanks for this info but they might say they told me the prices of the photos / portfolios before I signed the contract.

 

One thing I find odd is that if it is a legitimate credit agreement why it doesn't show up on my credit file like my other credit agreements and why I didn't get notification of late / missed payments when the direct debits were cancelled which I thought you had to do under the Consumer Credit Act 1774?  

 

You might say I could wipe the floor with them in court but I don't think I would be a match against an experienced solicitor and most people said it wouldn't get to court so i'm wondering what to do next.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The county court service is designed to be used by consumers. 

 

Here are the rules that all must comply with.

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct  an outline of the rules

 

But I would be inclined to write to these people. 

 

As far as you are concerned their part of the contract has not been fulfilled and there is no further liability for payment. 

 

Ask them to confirm the basis for the claim.

Ask hem to provide all documentary evidence they have in order to support their claim.

 

Offer them dispute resolution

 

Then wait to see what happens - i'm finding it stressful just reading the thread. But don't let these people bully you. The court service is there for both of us, not just them. 

 

Richard

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realise solicitors are simply people like you and I, just that they have a library of law books to read whenever someone goes to them about specific incidents....?

 

As you say it is unlikely that this would progress to a DJ, they simply prey on the weak and vulnerable and use legal jargon and fancy letter headed missives to intimidate.

 

 

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'm not sure if their side of the contract has been fulfilled or not, apart from poor customer service, as I have not finished paying the finance for me to get the services.

 

I just stopped paying them after onlne advice about it being a scam.

 

It looks as if I'm going to have to stand in front of a judge and say I think its a scam because of what I read online.

 

Do you think the judge will buy that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

see here we already have the basic structure

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/406231-the-pre-action-protocol-for-debt-claims-is-made-by-the-master-of-the-rolls-as-head-of-civil-justice-1st-oct-2017/

 

they are not mentioning the credit agreement at all so only the contract issues

pop your idea up here 1st 

and don't rush

you have 30days.

 

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

They say in the letter "the debt relates to a contractual arrangement between you and our client" and their client is the Photo Studio Group who the credit agreement is with so I think it does relate to that.

 

They have already sent me the contract which I asked for which is their proof that I owe the money, i'm not sure what other proof I can ask for?

 

Isn't an ADR a way of setting up a payment plan to pay them back?

 

I have just seen that the Photo Studio Group is a registered trader with the ADR company Consumer-Dispute http://www.consumer-dispute.co.uk/home

 

so I have asked for an application form to raise a dispute with them

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok but you still need and must reply to the PAPLOC within the 30 days.

 

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

the link i posted..

pre action protocol letter of claim.........

 

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

The ADR company said they would contact their member within a few days after my application is submitted so that will be well within the 30 days of the letter before action

 

I looked at the PAPLOC for consumer credit act claims and the debt has not been purchased so I can't ask for a copy of the Notice of Assignment. also i'm not sure what to put for the dispute as

the "recommended reason as advised from your thread"?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct yours is an interesting one.

it needs some thought.

 

p'haps others will pop in too

we have till december.

 

 

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 found a statement on a Facebbook page called "Modelling Information Service" that states Kube Studio (Renamed to The Photo Studio Group) is breaking the law because it is actually an employment agency and it is illegal for them to charge upfront. Maybe that would be a good defence? This is the quote:-

 

Kube Studios - getting your money back:
Kube Studios is one of those "agencies" which is using hard sell tactics to persuade models to pay the "agency" for photographs.
 
In its feature on Kube Studios, the BBC's "Watchdog" programme repeated Kube Studios' claim that it is "not an agency". It also referred to the "contract" as being "non cancelable" (see posts below - re BBC).
 
The "contract" as shown by the BBC bears the name "Fusion Photographic Studios Ltd T/A Kube Studios". That is confusing - as Kube Studios itself is a limited company Companies House https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08043958
 

Further to which, Fusion Photographic Studios Ltd no longer exists. On the 2nd April 2016 it change its name to: "Thomas Street Studios Ltd" (Companies House https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/.../043.../filing-history)

The tactics being used are both a scam and illegal.

 

As they are illegal this giving you the right to claim your money back - regardless of what the "agency" states (about "cancelling") in its "contract".

 

The question is raised as to whether Kube Studios is an (employment) agency(?)
 
Under the Employment Agencies Act 1973 (the Act), an employment agency is defined thus:
"13(2) For the purposes of this Act " employment agency " means the business (whether or not carried on with a view to profit and whether or not carried on in conjunction with any other business) of providing services (whether by the provision of information or otherwise) for the purpose of finding persons employment with employers or of supplying employers with persons for employment by them."
 
Among the services provided by Kube Studios is introducing work-seekers (models) to (other) agencies. That makes Kube Studios itself an employment agency.
 
In addition to the Employment Agencies Act 1973, employment agencies are governed by the Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations 2003 (as amended) (the Conduct Regulations).
 
The taking of photographs of work-seekers (models) is not a work-finding service, it is an additional (other service). Under the Conduct Regulations, it is a criminal offence for an employment agency to make the provision to work-seekers of the agency's work-finding services conditional on the work-seeker using any other services - whether these other services are provided by the employment agency or by any person with whom the employment agency is connected.
 
In addition, where the service is the "production of a photographic image" of a work-seeker seeking employment as a fashion/photographic model (and/or actor etc) the employment agency is prohibited from charging the work-seeker a fee for 30 days from the date of the agency entering into the contract with the work-seeker (whether the contract is oral or written), during which time the work-seeker is entitled to withdraw from or cancel the contract without suffering detriment or penalty, and without being obliged to pay any fee to the agency.
 
Both offences placing the "agency" in breach of the Conduct Regulations.
Regulation 30 of the Conduct Regulations:
"Civil liability
30. - (1) Without prejudice to -
(a) any right of action; and
(b) any defence, which exists or may be available apart from the provisions of the Act and these Regulations,
contravention of, or failure to comply with, any of the provisions of the Act or of these Regulations by an agency or employment business shall, so far as it causes damage, be actionable."
 
That is, because Kube Studiso has acted in breach of the Conduct Regulations, and the work-seekers (models) have suffered damage - the loss of money, they have a claim against Kube Studios.
 
Because Kube Studios has acted in breach of the Conduct Regulations you are entitled - under Regulation 30 of the Conduct Regulations - to claim your money back (damages) from Kube Studios, it matters not what Kube Studios state in the "contract".
Link to post
Share on other sites

The ADR company that have Photo Studio Group as a member has said this :-

 

 

Further to my email below and after liaising with the trader, they have confirmed the following:

 

“We have never encountered it and have no communication from the client. He's being chased for an unpaid debt by a third party. He needs to contact us and go through our complaints process before we will consider ADR.”

 

 

This is strange as the corresondance from AJJB Law and CRS say their client is the Photo studio Group but they don't seem to know anything about it. So what now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes this is what i was saying earlier.

 

it's quite usual for Ambulance Chasers like CSL/ALLB to do everything without their client knowing anything about it ...

thus any money they get goes directly to their pockets.

 

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

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...