Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The move marks the first time the country's central bank has raised interest rates for 17 years.View the full article
    • The firm has benefited from the AI boom, making it the third-most valuable company in the US.View the full article
    • Former billionaire Hui Ka Yan has been fined and banned from the financial market for life.View the full article
    • In terms of "why didn't I make a claim" - well, that has to be understood in the context of the long-standing legal battle and all its permuations with the shark. In essence there was a repo and probable fire sale of the leasehold property - which would have led to me initiating the complaint/ claim v SPF in summer 19. But there was no quick sale. And battle commenced and it ain't done yet 5y later. A potential sale morphed into trying to do a debt deal and then into a full blown battle heading to trial - based on the shark deliberately racking up costs just so the ceo can keep the property for himself.  Along the way they have launched claims in 4 different counties -v- me - trying to get a backdoor B. (Haven't yet succeeded) Simultaneously I got dragged into a contentious forfeiture claim and then into a lease extension debacle - both of which lasted 3y. (I have an association with the freeholders and handled all that legal stuff too) I had some (friend paid for) legal support to begin with.  But mostly I have handled every thing alone.  The sheer weight of all the different cases has been pretty overwhelming. And tedious.  I'm battling an aggressive financial shark that has investors giving them 00s of millions. They've employed teams of expensive lawyers and barristers. And also got juniors doing the boring menial tasks. And, of course, in text book style they've delayed issues on purpose and then sent 000's of docs to read at the 11th hour. Which I not only boringly did read,  but also simultaneously filed for ease of reference later - which has come in very handy in speeding up collating legal bundles and being able to find evidence quickly.  It's also how I found out the damning stuff I could use -v- them.  Bottom line - I haven't really had a moment to breath for 5y. I've had to write a statement recently. And asked a clinic for advice. One of the volunteers asked how I got into this situation.  Which prompted me to say it all started when I got bad advice from a broker. Which kick-started me in to thinking I really should look into making some kind of formal complaint -v- the broker.  Which is where I am now.  Extenuating circumstances as to why I'm complaining so late.  But hopefully still in time ??  
    • At a key lecture in the City of London, the shadow chancellor will also vow to reform the Treasury.View the full article
  • 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
      • 160 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

Vodafone UK Limited


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1089 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

Good Evening,

 

Hope you are all okay.


During the course of 2013/2014 to 2018 I got in a substantial amount of debt, basically I was hit with the debt spiral... Where I would take out credit and pay back BNPL that where due by taking out more credit... Long story short about 15 telecommications Debts, 10 Maxed out Credit Cards And getting fed up of hearing from Lowell Group, PRA Group, Moorcroft, Westcot Credit Services, DRS Recovery, Capquest and Arrow Global... The list kinda doesn't end.....

 

Anyways I'm raising irresponsible lending complaints because during the time of application bare minimum payments were made across multiple creditors.

 

In this Vodafone I had around 10 Maxed out credit cards practically of them with absolute minimum payments and always over limit.

Vodafone then decided to offer me more and more contracts after the first one wasn't even paid on time.. To make matters worse one of them was even Statue Barred back in early 201x.

But yet happily offered me multiple phones and tablets which of course were sold to pay off other debts.

 

I've challenged Vodafone in relation to irresponsible lending and have received a Deadlock letter.

Vodafone claim all their checks went through fine, and I agreed to the price shown.

My complaint was in relation to my financial background during the time i.e if It was responsible given my circumstances i.e maxed out credit cards and practically living beyond my means if it was responsible to offer me further credit without falling behind on essential living costs.

 

After Vodafone provided me with a deadlock letter, I apposed communications ombudsman which Vodafone has just today objected to the case as falling outside of their scope of works.

I'm seeking advice what to do further.

Obviously I understand I applied for the credit which I don't dispute, however drastic times call for drastic measures and whilst that was probably a bad choice I'm assuming businesses are held responsible as they are supposed to offer credit responsibly and ensure customers have the ability to pay back credit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

vodafone does not give credit

i don't think an IRL complaint is relevant

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 you have a debt with them, it will be reported on credit files, i'm not too sure what a credit check page is.?

 

could you have not only agreed to mobile service contract(s) with them, but also signed credit agreements for the devices?

that might explain things better? 

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

did you sign any separate credit agreements for the devices themselves that you sold on rather than just agree to have a free device as long as you pay the contractual monthly service charge?

 

some providers only use one of the three credit file companies, depends who their corporate group signed up 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

accepting an agreement or a contract or both?

if it was a mobile service contract AND a credit agreement for the phone then you would have had to have signed the agreement online as well as a separate area whereby you accepted the service contract. they are two totally separate things IF a credit agreement existed as well. your credit file should detail what these are if they show.

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 believe it's a service type of contract, but I'm not really sure.

It identifies it as a communications supplier from my Credit Report.

The FOS have asked for further details and they are able to at least look into it to see if it's something they can look into as they have permission from the communications dispute team.

 

Believe it or not I haven't actually been charged for the devices on multiple agreements...

They have said the balance won't raise but don't know why I haven't been charged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

looking good then.

yes i'm gonna assume the devices were simply given free as part of the service deal..come to us you get a free xxxx.

this could be quite interesting to see what the fos do actually.

 

a mobile phone contract is not consumer credit, so in itself it cannot come under a banner of 'irresponsible lending' by vodafone.

but the free phones introduce a interesting twist here and i expect the FOS will not ever want go there and simple state they have no remit to investigate any IRL issues as there was no 'irresponsible lending' by vodafone merely a series of service contracts which come under the remit of xxx organisation to investigate.

 

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

not sure what they state, but i suspect the FOS will say we are not the regulators of mobile phone service providers XXX are.

 

CEDR manages the Communications & Internet Services Adjudication Scheme (CISAS)

Modria

 

 

 

 

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

pdf please so we can zoom

 

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

thank you

then this could be fun.

i bet the FOS will come up with some excuse to drop this like a hot potato 

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...