Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you very much for your letter in regard to the above mentioned shipment.  Due to the high volume of parcels coursing through the courier network each day, undergoing continuous processing and handling, certain packages may experience delays or even can get lost in the course of this journey. Please note that due to the time that has passed, this shipment has been declared as lost.  I have today processed the claim and made offers to the value of £75 as a goodwill gesture without prejudice. I do acknowledge that you have mentioned in your letter that the value was higher, however, you did not take out any protection to that amount. The protection for this shipment was £20 and we will not be increasing our goodwill offer any further.    Please log into your account online in order to accept our offer. Once accepted, our accounts department will process the claim accordingly. The claim payment will be processed and received within 7 working days.                                  In addition, a refund of the carriage fee will be processed as a separate payment and will be received within 3 working days.  If I can further assist, please feel free to contact me.   I have also just noticed that yesterday afternoon they sent me an email stating that "after my request" they have refunded the cost of shipping. I did not request the refund so will mention that in my letter as well.
    • Hi I had to leave Dubai back in 2011, during the financial crisis. And only now have I received a letter from IDRWW. Is this anything to worry about about as I have 2 years left until it’s been 15 years(statute barred in Dubai). Worried as just got a mortgage 2 years ago. Could they force me in to bankruptcy? Red lots of different threads on here. And unsure what true and what isn’t. 
    • Not that TOR will see this now he's thrown in the hand grenade. Rayner has plenty of female supporters on X, for a start. As for the council and HMRC, fair enough and I thought Rayner was already in touch with them. That's where it should be dealt with, not the police force. @tobyjugg2 Daniel Finkelstein thinks the same as you about tax. The Fiver theory. How the Fiver Theory explains this election campaign ARCHIVE.PH archived 28 May 2024 17:36:51 UTC  
    • Often with the Likes of Lowells/ Overdales that 'proof' doesn't stand up to scrutiny.   Think about it like a game of poker, they want to intimidate you into folding and giving up as soon as possible, and just get you to pay up and roll over, that is their business model, make you think your cards are rubbish. What they don't expect, and their business isn't set up for it, is for a defendant to find this place and to learn that they have an amazing set of cards to play. Overdales don't have an infinite number of lawyers, paralegals etc, and the time / money to spend on expensive court cases, that they are highly likely to lose, hence how hard they will try to get you to roll over.  Even to the extent of faking documents, which they need to do because the debts that they purchased were so cheap, in the first place. Nevertheless it works in most cases, most people chicken out, when they are so close to winning, and a holding defence is like slowly showing Overdales your first card, and a marker of intention that this could get tricky for them. In fact it may be,  although by no means guaranteed that it won't even go any further than that.  Even if it does, what they send you back will almost certainly have more holes than Swiss Cheese, and if with the help you receive here, you can identify those weaknesses and get the whole thing tossed in the bin.
    • So Rayner who is don’t forget still being investigated by the local council and HMRC  is now begging to save her seat Not a WOMAN in sight in this video other than Rayner  Farage is utterly correct this country’s values are non existent in her seat   Rayner Pleads With Muslim Voters as Pressure From Galloway Grows – Guido Fawkes ORDER-ORDER.COM Guido has obtained a leaked tape from inside a meeting between Angela Rayner and Muslim voters in Ashton-under-Lyne...  
  • 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

Informing of correct address - moved and never informed in the first place? Practicality


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 264 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!

Just some general thoughts on the whole of informing creditors of your address.

If you had a foreign debt, moved away from that county and never informed them of your new address.

If they then tried to get say a CCJ on an address in the UK you lived at years before (but not any longer), how could that work practically? If you never informed them of an address, surely they need to prove that you live there for it to be valid in the courts?

I'm just asking for hypotheticals here and general thoughts.. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

is this to do with 

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

 

No,  just a thought, if they never had an address in the first place, is there any danger of not informing them of a new address? They need to be sure right and if you never informed them (either when you signed the contract in the first place, which would have been in another country, or informed them) they can't just use any address? 

For my case, In norway, you update your address at this joint "people registry" anyway (which you should do if you need to renew your passport etc), so it's in there if they look. 

But I just think it's and interesting thought. I get it  if you had signed a contract in the UK with a UK address and then moved, but if you have a foreign debt, surely they need to be certain before commencing legal action?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's just hypothetical, then why waste your time and energy on something that doesn't exist?

Are we talking hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, millions??

Back door CCJ's are commonplace, it's an easy win for DCA's to be awarded a CCJ by default as it goes undefended.

 

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter to them, the CCJ is registered against their name (the debtor) on their credit file for six years.

 

They simply go off the last known address, send out the letters and claim to that address, receive no response, take it to court where it goes undefended and they obtain the CCJ by default.

The next thing the debtor knows is they are refused a mortgage or other credit and they check their CRF see the CCJ, then raise their head above the parapet to try and get it set aside, and bobs your uncle,  the creditor, DCA, or whoever now has your address, and the whole cycle starts again.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ninja1337 said:

 

if they had no confirmation of address, how could the CCJ an address without confirmation that the debtor still lives there?

if you have a credit file in the uk, it has your uk address, then anyone can file a claim against you using that address even for a foreign debt.

you are forgetting the point that nothing is seen by any human if using MCOL to  file a claim via that automated bulk court claim centre.

if the above is true, then even if resident abroad its always wise to inform debt owners, it cant hurt you to do so only benefit .

cant see why you are here and on your other thread simply not doing it and arguing the schematics of it.

the fact that it might be unethical or perceived as out of order to attain a backdoor ccj, means nothing no-one in the system cares or checks. as its your job and very simple to protect against such not theirs.

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

Fair point, but I guess you could have a reasonable good argument to have it set aside if they have not sent it to the correct address.

But it's probably not worth that hassel. And as I understood it, you don't admit to any debts in these letters, but just inform them about your current correct address.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no you dont have a good argument, you have no argument, the ccj was correctly served to a legitimate address as you'd not informed them of your move..

atleast your 2nd assumption is correct mind.

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

But at the time I took out the debt, I would have lived in another country with a completely different address. 

What I am saying is, how would that be enough proof if they pulled one from my credit file,  when I have not in any form used that address for a creditor.

Should they not be required to check that it's actually the current one?

 I have informed them, but it was just some general thoughts. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

short answer is no, the address from your credit file would show the claimants due diligence even if said debt originated outside The UK and was nothing to do with any UK address. address linked to a debt doesnt have to match at all, it's for litigation purposes its needed

you keep forgetting that claims issued thru our bulk clearing centre are totally automated, no human checks anything, so even if the claimant does 'make a mistake' it goes thru.

its a lot simpler to send a letter than to try and set aside a default judgement that you might never know about for months and even years until your return to find it. 

there are 2 criteria for a successful set aside:

why you didnt get the claimform.

have you a viable defence as to why you do not owe the sum claimed by the claimant.

the former would poss be met by your thinking/theories, but the latter, regardless to it being a foreign debt, which since judgement no longer really matters, its a sum owed someone lent you, would be a hard and unnecessary hill to climb.

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...