Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You will probably get a couple more reminders followed by further demands fro unregulated debt collectors with even increasing amounts to pay. They are all designed to scare you into paying.  Don't. It's a scam site and they do not know who was driving and they know the keeper is not liable to pay the PCN. Also the shop was closed so they have no legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear. So to charge £100 is a penalty as there is no legitimate interest which means that the case would be thrown out if it went to Court.  Keep your money in your wallet and be prepared to ignore all their letters and threats. Doubtful they would go to Court since a lot more people would not pay when they heard  MET lost in Court. However they may just send you a Letter of Claim to test your resolve.  If yoy get one of those, come back to us and we will advise a snotty letter to send them.  You probably already have, but take a look through some of our past Met PCNs to see how they are doing.
    • Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
    • hi all just got the reminder letter, I have attached it and also the 2nd side of the original 1st pcn (i just saw the edit above) Look forward to your advice Thanks   PCN final reminder.pdf pcn original side 2.pdf
    • The airline said it was offering to pay $10,000 to those who sustained minor injuries.View the full article
    • The Senate Finance Committee wants answers from BMW over its use of banned Chinese components by 21 June.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
      • 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

Sainsbury incident now DFW letter


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 744 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

 

Hi,
my brother last week received a ban from Sainsbury for not paying for goods.
No police was involved, and they took his ID and said it was internal and that he is not welcome in any of theirs and partner store.
If he receives any dwf letters repeatedly, how he handle it. we had a tragedy in our family, being distracted and forgetting to pay is not an excuse, and  regrets it. However the security guards don't seem to care as he didn't pay.

im trying tell him not to worry.

however, in many forums that I have read, states that we ignore these threats as they are testing and using scare tactics.
Shall I just ignore these or shall I send them a letter stating " any liability to their client is denied and that we will not enter into any further correspondence". Then, am I giving them a reason to pursue more because I have responded?

I Have also asked my brother not to go into any Sainsbury for a very long time.
As mentioned, no police was involved and he was just escorted out of the store.
Please advise a professional response on how to deal with this. We haven't received any letters yet and hoping there is a chance he won't get one......

 

One more clarification,
if they keep sending letters, which we will ignore, but after the 4 or 5th letter, could we return the letter stating .."return to sender" or say "moved".
This way, perhaps they will stop sending and move on..
What is ur advice?

Also does DFW always send letters after such an incident? Or on occasion they ignore.

Tank you.

Any advice is helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, welcome to CAG. I've moved your thread to our Retail Loss Prevention / shoplifting forum for further advice.

 

Firstly, it's usually easier to deal direct with the person who has the problem. Is your brother with you and able to follow this thread?

 

We normally recommend that someone who's shoplifted has a chat with their GP or a helpline to see if there's anything else going on in their lives to make them do this or if there's extra help available. The important thing is that YB doesn't do this again because if there are other instances, it will get more serious. As you say, he needs to stay away from Sainsbury's.

 

See what others here think about writing back to DWF if you hear from them but I certainly wouldn't start playing games over this. How much money are we talking about please? Also, have you been looking at Freemen on the Land type websites?

 

Best, HB

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks.

Yes, my brother is with me.

Value of the smart shop un-scanned was about 20£. 

All was returned then and there.. unopened and very much resaleable. 

They said it was internal, took his ID details and that was end of it. 

He won't be going to Sainsbury at all maybe it be in our town or anywhere for that matter for a very long time.

Neither do he and i wish to interact with DFW ..should we receive letters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly will recommend that..

I'm having a chat with him..telling him not to worry.. but..never let this happen again ..

He understands the consequences if this happens again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You totally ignore DWF no matter what 

 

End of. No exceptions.

 

Dx

  • Like 1

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

God no. Their fictitious database means or has zero legal standing anywhere to anyone. No more than you having a list of friends.

 

Dx

  • Like 1

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

Thanks guys. 

The reason for asking is that my brother is a EU citizen applying for a settled status and is worried this may hamper his application...

I understand the response from HB and DX, and Greatly appreciate the time taken on a sunday to suggest actions....which is ignore and bin the letter. We will all be pretend we never got the letter.

 

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one external to DWF or if it was RLP, RLP, can legally have access to any crap they hold under the strict GDPR rules about pers data.

 

Likewise if they did pass it on, they would get hammered.

 

Can't hurt visa etc etc anyway. 

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Sainsbury incident now DFW letter
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...