Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you Please explain your words "The optics would not be good". I'm very stressed and not thinking right, sorry.  T&C are here:  Attention Required! | Cloudflare WWW.CURRYS.CO.UK   Each instore trade-in gift card says to use it to buy sepecfic product and that you can't use it towards airtime, certain phones or accessories but it also works on anything else.    Here example of voucher  currys voucher.pdf PS. my friend rang customer services in front of me and his card was emptied by the same person that emptied mine. He got his vouchers from 2x different stores so instore theft by employee isn't valid in this case. 
    • My main argument is that they are in receipt (on balance of prob) of my SAR 2022 letter and my letter of claim.   Regardless of this they chose to insist that my emails in 2021 are what my claim is about by saying:"   ". The Claimant has presented a claim seeking damages for alleged breach of the Data Protection Act 2018, Section 45 (3), following a subject access request he made in 2021.   However, the email chain makes it clear that the Claimant seeks information in relation to a third party's personal injury claim against him"   I'm arguing that they're (alleged) confusion is unwarranted as my most recent communications make it clear that I am intending to claim for my newest request dated 2022...   it seems to me they are purposefully taking advantage of the fact that my particulars of claim does not mention the exact date of my DSAR referred to in my claim, to pretend to confuse my claim with my old DSAR in 2021. Although my new letters which are on their system are clear.   They have:   1. ignored my letter of claim and my DSAR 2022 sent by letter 2. viewed their system and see my new letter for DSAR 2022 and letter of claim, and view my old emails in 2021. 3. insist that my claim is about my old SAR in 2021 and without asking for any clarity (on which DSAR my claim refers to) if they required, immediately fire of an application to strike out and supposedly spend hours on these documents.   (Also, technically, they are claiming that in my older DSAR dated 2021 that they provided all the data relating to me, that is their claim. However there is no evidence of that. I presume only the ICO can confirm such by reviewing their files...)     is what I'm writing making any sense? Please can the experts assess my defence, and let me know whether I should just pay the £1k in case the costs increase if it goes to a hearing.   My claim is only for a very small amount of money but they're claiming £1k..    
    • To answer the question whether Currys has a case against you, someone will need to analyse the detailed terms of the offer, anything you signed etc.    This is not the shoplifting type of case that RLP pursues. If anything, Currys will pursue you, but I can't see this happening. You took advantage of a weakness in Currys' design of the particular promotion. The optics would not be good.    I have the impression that your friend's gift card details may have been used fraudulently. Perhaps he should investigate it further with Currys. I am not sure he is right if his attitude is that you just don't argue any more. 
    • Morning DX,   Crashed out last night!   I shall submit the following defence today and have added point number 6 as you advised regarding the year until which I was in deferment and never earning more than the threshold.     The Defendant contends that the Particulars of Claim are vague and 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.   1. Paragraph 1 & 2 are noted the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor - The Student Loans Company. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or debt nor do I recognise the agreement numbers the claimant refers to. The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default.   2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1).   3. It is not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and   b) show how the Defendant’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and   c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and   d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.   4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant proves the allegation that the money is owed.   5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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.   6.  The defendant was in continued deferment until 2020 and has never earned over the threshold.   7. 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
    • Pressure on consumer finances is set to increase over the rest of the year, the supermarket saysView the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • 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
 Share

Recommended Posts

@Andyorch  allocation unless the court bypasses allocation given this is a Multi Track claim and moves straight to directions. 

 

What does this mean?

 

We are unable to afford legal fees. 

 

Spoke to solicitor today for an hour consultation and she says we will have to go through the courts and prove breach of contract etc and are looking at 2 to 4 years at £45,000 costs 😱

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once a claim has been set a side...the normal process if you had not got a default judgment would be for the claim to move to allocation stage...this allocates the claim to the respective court track (Small claims/Fast Track/Multi track) and transfers the claim to the litigants home court (its already at yours).The Notice of allocation gives the courts directions on how the claim will proceed..parties to submit statements evidence etc by a given date and informs you of the hearing date.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have had enough.  We want to keep FOS decision and leave the courts behind.  She has shut UK branch down and run back to Ireland.  All her other companies that she has she has now moved to Spain.  She is leaving UK and running.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know what the status of the Irish company is, Simmonds? I'm not wanting to cut across what Andy thinks, but in a way life would be easier for you if both companies close and everybody is able to claim from the FSCS.

 

I don't know if @Jcb2007has information on this at all.

 

HB

 

 

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We all understand the immense stress this has caused you.

 

However, consider this.  90%+ of Caggers are successful in court, and in 90%+ of those cases the other party has a solicitor.  Yet the Caggers win.

 

Solicitors can be useful but they can't perform miracles.  A rubbish case is a rubbish case.

 

You convinced the FOS and are highly likely to convince a court.

 

You don't need a solicitor - CAG is here to help should you decide to continue.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Andyorch  

 

if I withdraw I still have the FOS decision but can not enforce it.  Correct?

 

Seeing as she is not in UK now even if I won I would then have to go to Irish courts to enforce it. 

She clearly can not pay which is why she has Come up with her lies.

 

I would end up with a court order and a lot of costs and mega stress to still be unable to enforce it. 

Then I believe when I finally get to the end of the road she will close her business and then as they are ltd company I would have no payment. 

 

It is a no win case as I will never get WCFS to pay.

 

I just hope FSCS will eventually cover the loses that WCFS have made.  

 

This is why I want the FOS decision to stand as I will need it for the FSCS in the future.  I hope.

 

How do I withdraw? 

What do I put to make sure all is OK.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Simmonds7 Sorry I can't help on the status of Wellington's status in Ireland. You can never get through on the phone. My FOS case has not been assigned a handler, so I'm way behind you. I know at least one other on the Facebook page I told you about, who had the same FOS decision against WCFS as you, is about to get their CCJ served against them. I applaud you on your energy to keep going. If WCFS do fold then the limit is 85k as you know. Did you file a claim with the administrators (BBL) in Germany who are dealing with the GPG fiasco ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is that companies will have insurance to meet some claims but there will be a limit. I wonder if it is worth going back to the FOS and update them with what is going on? WCFS are still regulated. What's the point of FOS making these decisions if it is a torturous root to enforce them . You are not the only one who had FOS decisions against WCFS, I wonder if anyone else on the Facebook knows where they got to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I get from my FOS (when they can actually be bothered to answer) is once claim decision is accepted that's FOS done and the rest (including enforcement) is upto me.  I also get seek your own legal advice.  As if I can afford it.

 

They are 100% useless.

 

I believe that WCFS have NO insurance and that as they are claiming fraud their insurance company would not cover them anyway.

 

It is mega frustrating 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

How do I withdraw?  What do I put to make sure all is OK.

 

Simply ignore the court order and don't respond to point 3.1 (12/6/22) but comply with 3.2 and inform you do not wish to pursue.

 

End of claim.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

So once I do this what does it mean.  I know I probably sound stupid but I just need to know what doing 3.2 means in a whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

1. The Application is allowed.

2. The Judgment is hereby set aside.

3. By or before 4pm on 9 June 2022, the applicant shall either:

3.1. file with the Court and serve on the respondent a Statement of Case setting out the basis of the Claim; or,

3.2. give written notice to the court and to the respondent that the Claim will not be pursued.

4. There be no order as to costs in respect of the Application.

 

It means you write to the court and respondent and inform them you will not be continuing with the claim...I really cant explain it any simpler.

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I get that.  I mean.  How do I stand afterwards.

 

Have you read their Skelton argument?  The solicitor I saw today said I can't argue that they would have to do a judicial review as it should of been done at set aside hearing.  I did not know this. 

I was happy to proceed on the basis that FOS stands and need JR to object but not where I have to prove it all again.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't ask me that you asked....:-

 

Quote

How do I withdraw?  What do I put to make sure all is OK.

 

You PMed me the skeleton argument so you know I have read it.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I know.

 

I said "but I just need to know what doing 3.2 means in a whole."   What I meant was where do I stand after I withdraw.

 

I forgot you read the skelton argument.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you inform the court you do not wish to proceed...that is the end of the claim with regards to court procedure.....you are back as you where you started with your FOS award....unable to enforce it.

 

If you comply with 3.1 and file and serve particulars of claim...the claim proceeds and you get your chance at a hearing to argue your claim...backed by the FOS award...if you get judgment then you can enforce it by way of the bailiffs.

 

They cant set a side a second time.

 

 

 

.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you.  I think understand now.

So 3.1 is disagreeing  that the CCJ should not be set aside and why I believe that.

 

If I do 3.2 then that is end of it and im back to FOS decision again.  Can I do another CCJ at a later date?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@AndyorchIf I did 3.1

In the whole picture of things as in eventually...

It means I have to go through everything with the evidence I have from day dot through the courts? If so what is the FOS decision for, I might of well done the courts in the first place?

I need to have all the details of what will happen and the full process etc as I still don't understand.

Their skeleton argument is what they will use for evidence etc and that WCFS are being framed as their defence and that they can challenge the Fos decision through th courts.  Mine is FOS decision.  

Also I thought FOS could only be challenged via JR.  Is that not correct? As far as I know it is correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Simmonds7 said:

Thank you.  I think understand now.

So 3.1 is disagreeing  that the CCJ should not be set aside and why I believe that. No...the set a side is done completed, they got it you cant object....3.1 will allow the claim to proceed if you submit particulars of claim by said date...and you wont pay a further issuance fee.

 

If I do 3.2 then that is end of it and im back to FOS decision again.  Can I do another CCJ at a later date? Correct and yes you can issue a further claim with the courts permission but you will have to pay the full issuance fee on a Fast track/ multitrack claim  which would equate to 5% of the value of the total claim ...ouch!

 

Quote

If I did 3.1

In the whole picture of things as in eventually...

It means I have to go through everything with the evidence I have from day dot through the courts? If so what is the FOS decision for, I might of well done the courts in the first place? True but it adds weight to your claim and you are simply presenting the FOS award in detail from yourself rather than trying to enforce the FOS award without your input.

 

I need to have all the details of what will happen and the full process etc as I still don't understand.

Their skeleton argument is what they will use for evidence etc and that WCFS are being framed as their defence and that they can challenge the FOS decision through the courts.  Mine is FOS decision.  

 

Also I thought FOS could only be challenged via JR.  Is that not correct? As far as I know it is correct. Im really not sure you would have to check that out but Im sure a District Judge would know if you presented that in your particulars of claim

 

 

Regards.

 

 

 

.

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you @Andyorch  I am understanding it better now.

 

To onfirm I would not be able to issue another N322a form or N322b At £47 I would have to pay 5% of amount claiming via a tribunal I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could but it would be pointless because they would either just ignore it again and set a side or they could defend it and you would be back to where you are now having to submit a particularised claim.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Should anyone find themselves in this very unique position in the future I think it is worth noting one aspect of Wellingtons submission.

The main thrust of Wellington's argument to be able to challenge a decision made by the FOS is detailed at paragraphs 9 & 10.

To summarise they refer to case law, namely Bunney v Burns Anderson Plc [2007] EWHC 1240 (Ch) in which a challenge was brought to a FOS decision.

Having read through the case above the main premise was that the FOS had made an award outside of its remit which was an award in excess of £100,000. This was the basis upon which the FOS decision was challenged.

Wellington have construed this to mean that a FOS ruling can always be challenged.

Should anyone face this situation again I think it would certainly be worth raising the point that the mechanism for challenge referred to in the case law above was made in response to the FOS making a decision outside of its remit. In the case of Simmonds7 the FOS appears to have made a decision which was within its remit and I don't think it would be difficult to construct an argument that this should limit the scope for challenge.

If anyone has the time or inclination to verify my summary feel free to correct me on any of the points above.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...