Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I do disagree with you regarding one thing - we are not very good with letters or these situations and are slow on the uptake. So far you have stood up to Excel and their threats, immediately given us the information in the sticky, done loads of reading up to educate yourselves, learnt from the mistake of outing the driver so you'll know not to do so in the future, got on to the organ grinder to try to get them to call off their dogs, etc., etc.  Good grief - we wish everyone who came here would do this!!! Most people who get these invoices sadly think they have been fined and if they don't pay a drone from Ukraine will be diverted and will fall on their home (or some such vague grand apocalyptic threat) and they fold and give in.  You haven't.  Well done. Don't worry - you won't be paying a penny.  Although it will take some time to see off this vile company.
    • Spot on!  You learn quickly. Who cares if the case gets sent to debt collectors?  They have no powers.  All the effort you will have to put in will be to open envelopes - and then spend time laughing at their daft "threats".  No stress at all!
    • I did ask them why, but seems they have more spare cash than we do .. ;-( .. I doubt their bank would even support a chargeback after a year has passed. Anyway I've constructed my first DRAFT Snotty Letter .. so here goes ..   RE: PCN 4xxxxx Dear ALLIANCE PARKING Litigation Dept, Thank you for your dubious Letter Of Claim (dated 29th April 2024) of £100 for just 2 minutes of overstay. The family rolled around on the floor in amazement of the idea you actually think they’d accept this nonsense, let alone being confused over the extra unlawful £70 you had added. Shall we raise that related VAT issue with HMRC, or perhaps the custodians of the unicorn grain silos? Apart from the serious GDPR breach you’ve made with the DVLA and your complete failure in identifying the driver, we’re dumbfounded that the PCN is still not compliant with the PoFA (2012 Schedule 4 Under Section 9.2.f) even after 12 years of pathetic trial and error. We also doubt a judge would be very impressed at your bone idleness and lack of due diligence regarding the ANPR entry / exit periods compared with actual valid parking periods. Especially with no consideration of the legally allowed grace periods and the topological nature of the Cornish landscape versus a traditional multi-storey. And don’t even get us started on the invisible signage during the ultra busy bank holiday carnage, that is otherwise known as the random parking chaos in the several unmarked over-spill fields, or indeed the tedious “frustration of contract” attempting to get a data connection to Justpark.  We suggest your clients drop this extreme foolishness or get an absolute hammering in court. We are more than ready to raise the issues with a fair minded judge, who will most likely laugh your clients out in less time than it takes to capture more useless ANPR photos. We will of course be requesting “an unreasonable costs order” under CPR 27.14.2.g and put it toward future taxis to Harlyn Bay instead.  We all look forward to your clients' deafening silence. Legal Counsel on behalf of the Vehicle Keeper.  
    • Hi,t I'm not sure if I'm posting in the right subsection but General Retail appears to be the closest to it I think... About a year and a half ago I got a new phone so I listed my iPhone 10 on eBay.  The listed stated 'UK only' and 'no returns accepted'. Considering I had had the phone for about 4 years, I myself was amazed that I had kept it in such good condition all that time - apart from being slightly scuffed around the charging port there was absolutely nothing wrong with it. It had the original box, its unopened original Apple cable, plug, and earbuds, and I threw in a case for it and It had always had a screen protector on it. Someone wanted it from Armenia, and I stupidly agreed to it.  She paid and I sent it off, fully insured. Not long after she received it, she sent a message saying it 'was not as described', so I asked to see photos of whatever was the problem.  She sent two photographs of the box.  Just the box.  I said I wasn't even going to consider refunding her unless she told me what she meant by 'not as described'.  I thought, if it's been damaged in transit, then it would be covered by the insurance. Anyway, she didn't respond at all, even though I had messaged her several times, so she opened a case with eBay. I have sold a fair few things of mine on eBay in the past buy had never had had anyone come back to me asking for a refund.  I got in touch with eBay several times by phone and by email, and found out they always side with the buyer, no matter what with their 'eBay Seller Guarantee'.  She had been told she could keep the phone and told me they would recover the money from me from my account blah blah.  So I unlinked all of my cards etc and changed my bank account to one that I never use with no money in it. My account got suspended.  I continued to try to explain to eBay that I had been scammed but I got nowhere. My account was permanently inaccessible by this point. I reported the phone stolen and the IMEI blacklisted but I'm not sure if that would make any difference being in Armenia, but it was all I could think of to piss the buyer off. A couple of months later I was contacted by email by a debt recovery company (I can' remember who now), to whom I explained I will not discuss the matter with them until I had received an SAR I had requested from eBay. As I could no longer access my account, I couldn't review the communication I needed to show I was not in the wrong. The SAR was produced but I was advised that the information I was looking for would not be included but I said I wanted it anyway.  There were so many codes etc. and hoops to jump through to access it, that even after trying whilst on the phone to them, I still couldn't get into it, so I never got to see it in the end.  I think they said they would send the code by post but they never did and I forgot about it after a while. I've just come across a couple of emails from Moorgroup, asking me to phone them to discuss a private matter regarding eBay.  I haven't replied or done anything at all yet.  The amount they are trying to recover from me is £200ish from what I remember. I know it's not that much but I don't want to pay the b*astards on general principle. I've had a lot of useful advice from CAG in the past about debt collectors but it has always been about being chased by creditors, I've never been in this situation before. I don't know what power they legally have to recover the 'debt', and most importantly, I am two years into a DRO, and the last thing I want is another CCJ to shake off if I'm cutting my nose off to spite my face.   Any advice gratefully received!!
    • Hi, I have the Sims 4 on Macbook. Over the last year I have paid for multiple add on packs spending a lot of money on them. I bought them all in good faith as my Mac met all the minimum requirements to play them. I have been playing happily for about a year and bought my latest pack just over a week ago. The games were all working fine yesterday. Then suddenly today EA released a new app to launch the games and this new app requires a MAC OS that my computer cannot use. Now suddenly none of my games are accessible and I am unable to play anything. They did not warn us about this change in requirements and if I had known they would be doing this I wouldn't have bought all these add ons as they are now all totally unusable. The games themselves have not changed, only their app to launch them and I can't afford to buy a brand new mac just to play. So my question is how can they change the minimum requirements after I have paid for a game? I agreed to pay for them based on the fact my mac met their requirements and was not informed when purchasing that this would be an issue in the future. I understand new games (like Sims 5 which is to be released next year) might not be compatible but this is a 10yr old game that they have suddenly made inaccessible due to their new launch app. Does anybody know if I can do anything or anyway to get a partial refund from them? Thanks   Here are their T&C... I can't find anything in there about them being able to do this so not sure what to do https://tos.ea.com/legalapp/WEBTERMS/US/en/PC/
  • 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

Seahorse v Cabot


Seahorse
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5859 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

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I had a moan at Barclaycard a few weeks ago too. Complained about them selling a debt on that was just fairy stories, only saying they had 6 years worth of statements and nothing else when they somehow managed to send Cabot an application form, no proof of how they arrived at the default amount they did, etc, etc.

 

So, letter in this morning saying they can't give a full response yet, but wish to resolve the dispute as swiftly as possible, and I should hear by the 10th of December.

 

Doesn't sound very swift to me. But I'll wait to see what they say before I report THEM to the ICO as well.

 

Their letter wouldn't have been prompted by my Cabot complaints recently, by any chance????? Might they have been in touch with them recently? Time to SAR Cabot again, I think :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their letter wouldn't have been prompted by my Cabot complaints recently, by any chance????? Might they have been in touch with them recently? Time to S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) Cabot again, I think :D

 

 

:D You should know by now that they get CFC withdrawal symptoms if they don't hear from you!! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Awww, poor ickle diddims. Still, if they do, they could always try writing to me. That would prompt a response from me.

 

After I'd picked myself up off the floor, that is. I get the impression they wish the CFC would just go away ;)

 

Never mind. They should have the CSA's inquiry by now. CSA wrote to tell me they've been in touch. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I didn't expect a reply so quickly from Barclaycard. But one came today. :D

 

Unfortunately, it's to say that "my correspondance has becpme detached from my complaint". Eh? WTF does that mean? I hope it doesn't mean they've dumped my personal info in a bin and accidentally left it out to be picked over by Identity Thieves. I'll know who to blame if someone buys a house in my name.

 

On second thoughts, that's not very likely. Not since Cabot and RBS have conspired to make me uncreditworthy. :lol:

 

But anyway, looks like I'll have to send all my stuff off to them again. With a stern warning that a complaint to the FOS and ICO won't be far behind if they don't get their overpaid backsides in gear. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I didn't expect a reply so quickly from Barclaycard. But one came today. :D

 

Unfortunately, it's to say that "my correspondance has becpme detached from my complaint". Eh? WTF does that mean? I hope it doesn't mean they've dumped my personal info in a bin and accidentally left it out to be picked over by Identity Thieves. I'll know who to blame if someone buys a house in my name.

 

On second thoughts, that's not very likely. Not since Cabot and RBS have conspired to make me uncreditworthy. :lol:

 

But anyway, looks like I'll have to send all my stuff off to them again. With a stern warning that a complaint to the FOS and Information Commissioners Office won't be far behind if they don't get their overpaid backsides in gear. ;)

 

 

me thinks a little compensation is in order

 

compensation.jpg have you got any carrier pigeons ???

 

can i sneak this thread in

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/cooperative-bank/89128-mcuth-co-op-pii.html

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to be quite typical Theo. Cabot never seem to admit they are in the wrong. So eventually it reaches the stage that you can probably forget about them, as they know they won't win in court. Or if their actions are hurting you, such as by their reporting a default where none exists, it seems you need to exhaust their complaints procedure, followed by reporting them where approriate. I'm at that stage, and hoping to avoid having to take them to court. But I suspect that is what it will take.

 

Welcome to the Club, by the way. Nice to have you on board. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
I like it. Don't pull any punches then SH. LOL

 

He's one of the original Cabot Fan Club - we don't and never will - I think the DCA's are actually beginning to understand that now. :D

 

Seahorse is a Trojan Horse really and they'd better believe it ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

He's one of the original Cabot Fan Club - we don't and never will - I think the DCA's are actually beginning to understand that now. :D

 

Seahorse is a Trojan Horse really and they'd better believe it ;)

 

One wonders just how much Cabot would like to know who the original members are lol - From small seeds do great things grow ;-)

Just hate every DCA out there

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Similar. But if at all possible, even twistier. Cabot may buy with one company and collect with another. But at least they don't go around trying to conceal their place of business, or whatever it is Arrow hope to achieve with their obfuscation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked into the way that data controllers have to register themselves and have indicated on another thread that they may be forced to do business this way. When these companies register as data controllers they have to state that they will process data to 'purchase debt' and to 'collect debt on behalf of a third party'. I do not think they can process data to collect data they have purchased themselves.

I got this from the IC website. If this is true is it something we can use to our advantage? Or is it something we are ignoring?

 

Newborn

  • Haha 1

Beaten:

RBS: £4,500

AMEX: £4,200

Barclaycard Visa: £12,100

Barclaycard M/Card: £12,600

(Including the numerous DCAs they have set on me.)

PPI reclaims (into my bank account): £25,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have looked into the way that data controllers have to register themselves and have indicated on another thread that they may be forced to do business this way. When these companies register as data controllers they have to state that they will process data to 'purchase debt' and to 'collect debt on behalf of a third party'. I do not think they can process data to collect data they have purchased themselves.

I got this from the Information Commissioner website. If this is true is it something we can use to our advantage? Or is it something we are ignoring?

 

Newborn

 

In which way would you envisage us using this to our advantage? More minds the merrier ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...