Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • 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

Wellington court financial services ltd not paying out on FOS final decision RE: +£58k Pension- help enforcing & using form N322A - court claim issued


Simmonds7

Recommended Posts

Are you planning to speak to the FoS on Monday? Depending on how it goes, it might be worth asking if you can get the FCA involved as well. As a bit of a long shot, you also have the Irish financial regulator.

 

Also, who are you in touch with at Wellington and have you had dealings with their compliance people at all?

 

This may have limited relevance but when I was searching on the internet, I came across this article from the trade press. They were told to stop advising on pension transfers.

 

WWW.MONEYMARKETING.CO.UK

The FCA has stopped a firm involved in transfers out of a local government pension scheme from engaging in such activity. 

 

There's even a high court case against them by Pension Advice Specialists Ltd, accusing them of plagiarising a report they'd written. Sadly, I'm not eligible to join the site below and I haven't found anything about the case outcome so far.

 

WWW.LAW360.COM

A British pensions adviser has sued a financial services company in London to stop it from using a report to make retirement recommendations...

 

They seem to have a lot of problems and I notice that the ombudsman says they're aware of other complaints about Wellington Court, so there may be other awards against them.

 

HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the information I will have a read.

 

I have informed FCA already and they have noted it.  I will contact them again Monday to give them the update on their last email.

 

I have phoned my case worker at FOS twice and no call back yet. I have forwarded their emails to her though.

 

I know of 200 that are after Wellington court financial services ltd in regards to Guiness Mahon alone.

 

I will look into the Irish Ombudsman too.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

200 people? That's a vast number. Have you formed a group?

 

I guess it's wirth contacting Ireland, the regulator seems to be the Central Bank of Ireland.

 

WWW.CENTRALBANK.IE

This is the landing page for the regulation section of the Central Bank of Ireland's website.

HB

 

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

My accountant introduced me to a guy that was an introducer but not FCA registered so couldn't do the transfer etc so gave our details to Wellington court financial services ltd who phoned us and dealt with everything and advised us to go with dolphin 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I reported them to financial regulator in Ireland and here in UK for non compliance of FOS final decision.  Got a reply from them.....

 

Thank you for your emails dated 21.11.2021 and 22.11.2021.

 

We understand that you are a very angry man as you have been badly let down by Guinness Mahon and Dolphin Capital.

 

Please note:

 

You know that you did not have any dealings with Wellington Court Financial a Service Ltd (Wellington) and did not receive advice from Wellington.

 

You clearly instructed and dealt with third parties unknown to us.

 

You gave transfer instructions directly to your pension plan providers to transfer your pension/s to Guinness Mahon who invested in an unregulated fund in Germany, Dolphin Capital.

 

You have lodged an unwarranted complaint against Wellington with the FOS.

 

You appear to have entered into a conspiracy to defraud Wellington for your commercial benefit.

 

The decision from FOS is based on a mammoth cover up and fraudulent documentation that has been produced as evidence.

 

As previously stated your claim against Wellington Court Financial Services Ltd is fraudulent.

 

Please refer to Fraud Act 2016, (Fraud by false representation {Section 2}, Fraud by failure to disclose information when there is a legal duty to do so {Section 3}, Obtaining services dishonestly {Section11})

 

The FCA is fully aware of the Guinness Mahon matter, involvement of third parties and their clients making fraudulent claims since 2016.

 

Any liability is denied as it is a fraudulent claim.

 

We value our regulatory status and we do not deal with unregulated products. We have not had any dealings or connection with Dolphin Capital in the UK, Ireland or abroad.

 

We reserve the right to file a counterclaim into the court for your fraudulent claim and damages to our good name and standing.

 

With respect you are “barking up the wrong tree”.

 

By sending us threatening and blackmailing emails you will not achieve your goals and may get yourself involved into unforeseen problems.

 

Therefore in your own interests you should put this matter into “balanced hands” and appoint a solicitor to deal with these issues before they get out of hand.

 

Please feel free to forward our email to the FOS if you wish.

 

Should you wish to discus the content of this email please do not hesitate to contact us or let us know the best time and we will telephone you.

 

Our solicitors will contact you shortly.

 

Wellington Court Financial Services Ltd reserves the right to protect its interests and its good name with the utmost vigour of the law.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No personal name was given just Wellington court at the end. 

Have phoned FOS 3 times and left messages, no return call received yet. 

 

Have forwarded all emails onto FOS but no reply yet. 

Have sent 3 emails asking them to advise etc and again no reply. 

 

Am emailing my MP Monday if still no reply from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure first one was...

"Today is day 28 since the legally binding final decision from the Financial Ombudsman Service was given and accepted by myself.  I have not had a reply to previous email or any correspondence from your company.  


Can you confirm payment will be made today? or a date when it will be paid.  


I want to hear from you by close of business today. 


As of Tomorrow 8% interest will be added for late payment and the form N322A will be filed at court on Monday.  This is just a formality so I can enforced payment with High Court Sheriffs.  The court costs and High Court sheriffs costs will be added to the amount owed.  


It is in the company's best interest to pay the amount owed and Communicate with myself as I am sure you do not want a CCJ on file against your company and high court sheriffs at your door. "


THEN SECOND EMAIL SENT WAS.....


"I have reported you to FCA for non compliance of FOS legally binding final decision.  I have also reported you to your other financial regulator at Central Bank of Ireland.  Both do not look favourable on non compliance of an FOS final decision.


I request that you reply to my response of your email sent Friday by end of today and confirm receipt of this email.


I am trying to assist your company by letting you know of the additional costs that will be incurred from high court sheriffs not threaten, I have won my case against you and i do intend to enforce it."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just got a reply from fOS

 

I’m sorry to hear that Wellington Court Financial Services Limited hasn’t complied with the ombudsman’s decision.

 

Unfortunately, there is little more that the Financial Ombudsman Service can now do.

We have let the regulator (the FCA) know about this issue.

 

But that might not be enough to change Wellington Court’s mind so you may need to consider taking legal advice for the best way to enforce the decision.

I’m sorry this isn’t the answer you were looking for. But we don’t have the power to enforce decisions – ultimately only the courts can do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can make that 201 complaints.

 

I also came to learn that Wellington CFS had a hand in my Scottish Widows pension transfer to Guinness Mahon.

 

I had some contact with them and an email saying  they had no record of me.

My case is with FOS.

 

I know of one other whose FOS claim against Wellington CFS has been upheld and FOS have instructed Wellington to pay back the initial investment + interest + costs.

 

I personally think Wellington CFS days are numbered. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I seriously doubt you'd ever get anything from them if they go bandy.

 

However its worthy for people to investigate the fscs here.

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...