Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • @dx100uk being the stresser that I am, I’ve tried to get as many viewpoints as I can. I’m pretty dismayed with one I’ve received on Reddit, whereby someone thought I had a good case, but have now backtracked, and gave some Argos terms and conditions which have me worried.    They firstly wrote to my query…  OP, this is a straightforward cancellation under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, which replaced the Distance Selling Regulations. That you picked it up from an Argos store is irrelevant - it was a distance contract because you didn't get to inspect the goods before making the purchase. As your parents cancelled the contract within 14 days of taking possession of the item, by bringing it back to the shop, they do not need to prove that there is anything wrong with it at all. The 14-day window for a refund technically started on the day you (tried) to return it. However, as it is on you to show that you cancelled it, I suggest you do so in writing to Argos. Please also complain to trading standards (you must use the Citizens Advice Bureau to do this now) about Argos's behaviour - we see this problem here on a regular basis.     he has then since came back with this…   In the Regulations, reg 5 provides that "distance contract" means: a contract concluded between a trader and a consumer under an organised distance sales or service-provision scheme without the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer, with the exclusive use of one or more means of distance communication up to and including the time at which the contract is concluded; Argos's terms and conditions say that the contract is not concluded until the goods which you have already paid for have been collected (clause 2.3). Depending on how "collected" is interpreted, this may not be a distance contract after all, because the contract was not "concluded between a trader and a consumer ... without the simultaneous physical presence of the trader and the consumer," and there was not "the exclusive use of one or more means of distance communication up to and including the time at which the contract is concluded". So Argos's position would be that you could have arrived at the front counter, had the iPhone brought to you, inspected it, and decided not to take it. That would have meant that the order was not "collected", so the contract was not concluded - there was no contract. At the point you decide to accept the iPhone, the item is "collected" and the contract is concluded - but as this was on their premises, it cannot be distance selling within the meaning of the Regulations. I must admit, it's a new one - I can't find mention of them adopting this position successfully anywhere online but I'm afraid it is fairly legally compelling. To counter this, you would need to try and show that the term around when the contract is concluded is a sham or unenforceable term, or more likely unfair, but even with the considerable leeway afforded to consumers in consumer contracts, you may struggle to defeat privity of contract. I think go back to trading standards and see where you can get.  
    • not a chance of police involvement after the event the police are not interested in small fry, just the big organised gangs that shoplift to fund drugs. dx
    • or just click any named forum and we'll move it here for you.   dx  
    • oh yea ta! one last question what date was the CCJ/Default judgement? dx
    • maybe a dodgy letter but you can avoid those too. police are VERY VERY unlikely so don't stress about that.
  • 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

Lowell/overdales claim 2017 Judgement over son's Very CAT debt


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 375 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

well there obviously is/could well a CCJ else they would not be writing...

 

as they say it was gained on 29/12/17 thats within 6yrs 

go get your credit file please

 

does it show?

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to overdales claim i have a CCJ from 12/17

reviews??

they are solicitors for the largest debt collector in the uk lowells. rarely do lowells bluff on existing CCJ's

ok a debt collector has zero legal powers and are not bailiffs

but

they buy old debts

and fleece people out of money or try too.

 

people can ignore all they like but if they ever sent  letter of claim or  the debtor gets a court claimform , they like you or i can take people to court, and if that person has moved and never updated anyone.. = backdoor ccj guaranteed.

 

i suspect your son has had mail elsewhere and has ignored it all even the court claim and an eventual court judgement in 2017.

they are only doing this as the ccj is coming upto 6yrs old

that sort of makes it a bit more difficult to enforce it (i.e back to court to ask the judge to send bailiff whom are all but powerless too on consumer credit related CCJ's) no forced entry allowed.

 

i would suspect your address is the original one he took the debt out at in 2012 as you seem to know a bit about it.

 

not saying do anything nor pay it, but it would be better to know its real 

 

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

what has?

 

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 overdales claim son has a CCJ from 12/17

nothing. i suspect.

so he has bought this round to you not knowing what to do?

did he know about the CCJ existence before now?

 

overdales can quite legally write to any linked address on his credit file chasing payment of this ccj.

 

in 2012 he was living with you when he took this credit out i suspect, then he must have moved to another address where everything went too and then he moved again to the address they've just written too?

.

that doesnt hurt him, they are just phishing trying to finding him 

 

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

Not at all 

 

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

He has till now.

You say he rang them?

What information did he give them?

And what is the actual debt all about please.

 

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

So probably all made of old buy now pay later fake interest anyway 

 

Trying to get info out of you is like pulling teeth. 

 

Did he know anything about this ccj existing at all prior to the letter? 

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

Well he has to date....

 

They've had 6yrs to enforce it and they haven't 

 

Why do you keep putting up silly trust pilot crap 

Totally irrelevant.

 

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

8 hours ago, holsdad said:

There is mention in the letter above something bout n agreement to pay £100 per month but I don't know if that was court or just him agreeing to pay.

 

that looks like what the judge ordered to be paid £PCM 

it says payments were not maintained,  this could imply he had at somepoint since 2017 paid some payments?

ive asked before, but it this the 1st he has ever heard about the existence of thisCCJ? why cant he come up on the forum himself rather than playing chinesse whispers through you?
 

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

when was this and did he ever pay anything?

obv before the above letter so he did know about the ccj before showing you the letter he appears to be being cagy to me

 

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 Lowell/overdales claim 2017 Judgement over son's Very CAT debt

no good paying it off -  does not remove the CCJ or make it less painful, he wont get credit whilst it shows.

it's there, paid or not, paying or not, it will drop off his file on its 6th birthday. which is very soon.

 

on of the only things they can do is get bailiffs involved but to be honest that doesn't really change anything, this is a consumer credit CCJ, that means NO RIGHT OF FORCE ENTRY, and in practical terms you simply ignore the bailiff totally.

 

quite honestly i'd go radio silent on them, he has managed it for almost 6yrs , only gotta string them out ill the new year and he can get all the credit he likes then as the CCJ entry will drop off his file.

 

there are a few other things they could try, but all of those involve a court , and any court would write to him telling him what is going on, then we can deal IFIF IF these happen

 

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

they don't.

read CAREFULLY what i am advising you.

but they ARE removed from public record (credit files) after 6yrs.

 

and once a CCJ passes 6yrs, it's extremely rare for a court to allow enforcement. which is where they would have to go to try and enforce one.

 

 

they have had almost 6yrs and done nowt, he got a phishing letter, and sadly rang them (doesn't really change anything), but that's the idea of these letters, to reel people in.

 

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 a new thread please in the utils forum

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...