Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • 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

Huge PayPal negative balance of £23k (business accounts)


JHall2023

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

Recently a series of direct debits failed as a result of insufficient funds in our bank account causing negative balances across two PayPal accounts of -£18k and -£5.5k.

I have reduced the first balance to just under £12k but haven't touched the other account.

It has been roughly 2 weeks since the accounts went negative and PayPal advised there is nothing I can do and the amounts are automatically passed to DCAs.

I have seen similar threads due to gambling etc but obviously these are personal situations and in my case it's a business liable. One of the business accounts is under a relative's name even though they aren't a director of the company - does this situation affect them? 

There is a balance of £500 from PayPal Working Capital and the system won't let me pay it due to a negative balance.

As far as I know, negative balances are not a form of credit so cannot be reported to CRAs but I am wondering if the impact of a debt collection agency can show on credit files.

Will the PayPal Working Capital balance default if this is thrown in with the negative balances and sent to a DCA? Ideally I'd prefer to clear that £500.

@dx100uk would appreciate your input (even though it's an LTD)

Link to post
Share on other sites

not sure where people get the idea that because a DCA gets involved in a debt they can make a debt magically appear on credit files, NO!! they do not have the magical powers to 'make it so'...they are not Cpt Piccard!!

a dca is not a bailiff

and have 

ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT it's type.

were these accounts originally opened  pre-brexit?

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

the later one poss. things changed mid year with updates agreements/t&C's

was it just a trading account (Ebay shop? thingy) and the £500 from PayPal Working Capital, what did you sign and was there a personal guarantee too you signed?

should be in your emails for that period.

but the 1st pre brexit is a dead duck for sure totally ignore unless they ever sell the debt on and you get a notice of assignment from a DCA/debt buyer and then a letter of claim.

 

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

PayPal Working Capital just has an Agree and Continue button when you enter the company officer details. The business operates on a website and accepted PayPal payments. I didn't sign anything on WC

Just got this also: On 1st November 2023, your account will move from PayPal (Europe) to PayPal UK Ltd. Visit our FAQ page to learn more.

I’ve read up on the move to PayPal UK. Before they wouldn’t be able to take legal action as they were based in Luxembourg, now it’s not looking good as they’re taking control of accounts from the past and present. Maybe I should just bite the bullet arrange a payment plan with the DCA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what your financial situation is but if the threat is to sell it on to a DCA, it really isn't an immediate worry. 

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

I think if PayPal sell the debt that makes it worse as the DCA are making it a credit agreement. If the DCA work on behalf of PayPal on a commission basis then it’s not as serious.
 

I do believe with the pending PayPal UK switch this has gotten much worse and they could potentially take legal action.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, maybe not, but a DCA is not an immediate threat, and can be safely ignored until such a time as if and when a Claimform arrives.  That point in time could be 1, 2, 5 years away or never.  So you losing sleep over this now is pointless.  It's also wasting money paying anything right now.

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

So if and when it gets to that point the DCA will still happily negotiate and accept an affordable payment plan?

The company owes £40k across legally binding creditors like NatWest and Funding Circle so I’d rather focus on these.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The DCA can be ignored until you receive a Claim form, at that point you can defend the claim. Debts usually get sold on to DCA's for pence in the pound because there is something wrong with them. When / if the time comes , get back to this thread and we will help you.

Stop worrying about this, it's, keep it at the back of your mind , ignore all the idle threat letters from the DCA. The one you are looking for is a Claim form, so make sure you open all of your mail, but as I say it may never happen.

Whatever happens do not make any payments to the DCA either.

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

I can certainly ignore letters, calls etc. The issue is when they send doorstep collectors. I know they’re not bailiffs and cannot enter but it’s a bit embarrassing isn’t it? I’m sure if the company is motivated enough they would send collectors

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Huge PayPal negative balance of £23k (business accounts)
3 hours ago, JHall2023 said:

Maybe I should just bite the bullet arrange a payment plan with the DCA.

GOD NO NEVER PAY A DCA.

1 hour ago, JHall2023 said:

think if PayPal sell the debt that makes it worse as the DCA are making it a credit agreement.

total BS!!

1 hour ago, JHall2023 said:

So if and when it gets to that point the DCA will still happily negotiate and accept an affordable payment plan?

no totally ignore until/unless you ever get a letter of claim.

1 hour ago, JHall2023 said:

I know they’re not bailiffs and cannot enter but it’s a bit embarrassing isn’t it?

they cant do ANYTHING!! your next doors cat has more rights on your property

stop being scared and where ever you've read most of what you have posted...its TOTALLY WRONG.

1 hour ago, JHall2023 said:

I do believe with the pending PayPal UK switch this has gotten much worse and they could potentially take legal action.

rubbish, cant turn an eu debt into an enforceable UK debt - not ever ever possible. debts dead gone forget about it.

overall i think you'll get away with simply ignoring everyone. it's part of ebays business model anyway. you do realise ebay is reported to lose about £4.5M every week on bad debts and scams..they make 15 times that in profit mind.

i know someone with £47K business debt with PP EU from an ebay store he ran from 1998 right thru till 2022, oneday he just had to give up due to health. even though it transferred to PP uk after brexit... he never signed anything ever over all the years in june the sols for ebay uk wrote and said its been written off. no paperwork enforceable in the UK.

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

samething as before brexit yourwere paying ebay thru paypal, ebay had no direct payment mechanism....think about it...

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

sorry i must admit i only though pp existed pre brexit  for businesses through an ebay  online shop.

but what you signed upto still falls outside uk jurisdiction until of recent.

id let it run.

 

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

Don't think I'll let the Working Capital run though. Best to pay that directly with PayPal ASAP 

Jurisdiction

The Merchant irrevocably agrees for the exclusive benefit of PayPal that the English or Welsh courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any claim,

dispute or matter arising under or in connection with this Agreement or its enforceability or any non-contractual obligation arising out of or in connection with this Agreement and that accordingly any proceedings in respect of any such claim, dispute or matter may be brought in such courts.

Nothing in this Clause 8 shall limit the right of PayPal to take proceedings against the Merchant in any other court of competent jurisdiction, nor shall the taking of proceedings in any one or more jurisdictions preclude the taking of proceedings in any other jurisdiction or jurisdictions, whether concurrently or not, to the extent permitted by the law of such other jurisdiction or jurisdictions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know your financial situation, but I'm guessing it isn't great, after all you are posting on this forum.  This is why I am trying to explain along with other members of the site team, who myself included have been through all this, that all that you should be worrying about are your priority debts eg mortgage / rent, Council Tax Energy Bills etc.

Paying anything to a DCA is a waste of your money, and is actually detrimental in that it keeps the Statute barred clock resetting. You fretting at this point about whether it's EU or UK Juristriction is at the very best a waste of your time and energy, because nothing is going to happen any time soon.

If Paypal were so sure that they could crush you in a court of law, don't you think they would have done it by now?  They have effectively written your £23k  off by selling it to some cowboys for 10p in the pound. Does that seem to you like they are confident it would stand up?

And lets get to the DCA who make their money by sending off speculative claim forms, hoping that they won't be defended, and thereby winning by default. You have found this place where there are all the tools you need to defend if the issue comes up.

Even if you ended up one day with a CCJ on this, honestly your world will not end, welcome to half the UK population! A judge will look at your income and expenses, worst case scenario £50 per month.

Yet here you are worrying yourself sick about a complete non issue. Stop!

  • Like 2

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

Thanks for the help. I will keep you lot posted on what happens. Currently balances are still with PayPal and haven’t been passed to a DCA yet - I’ve paid the Working Capital facility off in full as it’s a form of credit.

Everything else will be ignored and I will concentrate on paying priority UK creditors and HMRC. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You’ve said “company” and “director”.

Is this a limited company? Sole trader? Partnership? Limited liability Partnership??

If a Limited Company (which limits the directors’ liability, absent other liability), did any of the directors sign personal guarantees?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a limited company. PayPal accounts just have an agreement when you sign up I guess. No signatures made for the PayPal accounts created.

One of the accounts is under a trading name rather than the LTD and emails are addressed to me personally. It is a business account though.

It’s up to the DCA to hold the directors responsible or the company. The liability only disappears in event of liquidation I think and we won’t be liquidating anytime soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, JHall2023 said:

Don't think I'll let the Working Capital run though. Best to pay that directly with PayPal ASAP 

Jurisdiction

The Merchant irrevocably agrees for the exclusive benefit of PayPal that the English or Welsh courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any claim,

dispute or matter arising under or in connection with this Agreement or its enforceability or any non-contractual obligation arising out of or in connection with this Agreement and that accordingly any proceedings in respect of any such claim, dispute or matter may be brought in such courts.

Nothing in this Clause 8 shall limit the right of PayPal to take proceedings against the Merchant in any other court of competent jurisdiction, nor shall the taking of proceedings in any one or more jurisdictions preclude the taking of proceedings in any other jurisdiction or jurisdictions, whether concurrently or not, to the extent permitted by the law of such other jurisdiction or jurisdictions. 

total bunkum!! might work in other eu countries but not the uk.

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

3 hours ago, JHall2023 said:

It’s a limited company.
…….

One of the accounts is under a trading name rather than the LTD and emails are addressed to me personally. It is a business account though.

 


Activity by a limited company has to refer to the fact that the company has limited liability,. So “Acme products, a trading style of acme Ltd.”.

if this was done, and no person guarantees were signed : the directors are not personally liable for the company’s debts.

As for “ The liability only disappears in event of liquidation I think and we won’t be liquidating anytime soon” : If the company is insolvent the directors can’t allow it to continue trading / allow it’s losses to increase.

If they deliberately allow it to do so, then

a) that could create “personal liability” for the future losses (as they are breaching one of the directors’ fiduciary duties) and

b) could be barred from future directorships as a result.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

open

 

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...