Announcements
-
-
Tweets
-
-
Posts
-
This auction was all undertaken 'on-line' on the 8th June, on their Sandy location... I'm sorry, I am unable to see where the odometer reading is a 0. thanks -
By SuzanneVega · Posted
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. -
By mars3424234 · Posted
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.. -
By mantis shrimp · Posted
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
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
-
Our picks
-
Contacting loved ones in Ukraine
45002 posted a topic in Telecoms - mobile or fixed,
Contacting loved ones in Ukraine. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/446558-contacting-loved-ones-in-ukraine/&do=findComment&comment=5156526- 0 replies
-
Post in Hermes parcels scandal continues - plus Times Radio interview audio file
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
- Jenny Kleeman and Luke Jones with Times Radio Breakfast Times Radio The Times and The Sunday Times.mp3
-
-
Post in Hermes parcels scandal continues - plus Times Radio interview audio file
BankFodder posted a post in a topic,
- Jenny Kleeman and Luke Jones with Times Radio Breakfast Times Radio The Times and The Sunday Times.mp3
-
-
Buy a homeless person Christmas Dinner - Social Bite
stu007 posted a topic in Homelessness,
Buy a homeless person Christmas Dinner - Social Bite. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/443900-buy-a-homeless-person-christmas-dinner-social-bite/&do=findComment&comment=5145464- 0 replies
-
-
Recommended Topics
-
Hx Parking/gladstones CCJ - Exceeded 1hrs Free - McDonald's Alma Leisure Park Chesterfield CCJ issued thanks to useless parking fines ltd - continued.
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now