Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Dear CAG Team   Given the above, and not knowing what the actual account name is, I will haver to stick with that same name but the Bailiff said that once the variation is done there wont be an issue getting the money off him. What i cannot get my head around is when i set up a new payee, if the name doesn't match the account name my bank wont allow the transfer. So how is it that it authorised and allowed the transfer? Also, given the dealer broike trading standard rules and tried to sell me a death trap, then keep my deposit, why is his bank and mine protecting him by not disclosing his account name or at least making a charge back as i first attempted?   Many thanks
    • DX100UK  ill try to give as much info as i possibly can. this situation goes back to early 2022 i purchased a pc from an online company mac group ltd it was ordered and paid over the phone but they kept changing the delivery date so i ended up phoning them up and cancelling the order and got a full refund then thought it was done with,there was no hp agreement just to be clear. then i was told by mac group the pc had been delivered to mine and had it tracked to my address with a different inital but correct surname no photo of said parcel,so basically ignored it as i was dealing with my dad and my brothers estate which seamed more important as i thought the situation with the pc would sort its self out but it didnt it escalated in to mac group issuing a ccj against me and got the court pack from northants,visited by bailiffs on 3 occasions which i did not engage with,but didnt realise i needed to turn up at court so it was thrown out. mean time ive moved and they dont know my new address but started to email me jan 2024 stating they intend to recomend their client to bankrupt me,got some advice from cab re: applying the case to be set aside but as you will see from the paperwork ive uploaded it was struck off and i have no idea why as the court staff are not legally trained to tell my why when i phoned last week. mac group applied for a n244 statuary demand i am really worried ill lose the house if they do bankrupt me but i do realise i should have dealt with it sooner but i was grieving for two family members not sure thats a good enough reason. thanks. dcbl_Redacted.pdf mac group.pdf
    • Please fill in the sticky as dx asked. Was the kids' party inside the Bizspace area?
    • Hi dx, I think so I'd have to dig out the paperwork to double check. Pretty sure it is though. Pm
    • I have a problem, a serious one. On mid November 2023 my boiler (installed 10/21) failed and flagged up the code 29.10: blocked flue. The EB engineer came out and replaced the fan, said it was unusual, put it down to storms. On 16/12/23 the same thing happened. Another WB engineer came 18/12/23 and fixed it, but said it isn't the boiler, it is the flue, and that he would mend it this time under the guarantee but they would not do that again if it failed unless I got the installers to reinstal it. On 27/12 it failed again. 29.10. I did not call them because of their saying I would have to pay. I contacted the installers who responded, then stopped when they saw the WB report of 18/12. By February I had had no central heating or hot water since Christmas, so I posted a job for a heating engineer to give an opinion on the flue installation. He found the flue blocked with vegetation from the trees my neighbour planted near the wall, and which I have been desperate to get uprooted. He gave a report and photos, and agreed the flue needed reinstalling. I got nothing from the original installers, so I contacted the Gas Safe Register. They sent an inspector, who gave a full report and had the original installers down and they reinstalled the flue as instructed, and notified LA Building Regulations.   On Friday I received a certificate from the Gas Register saying the reinstallation of the flue had  been carried out by a registered heating engineer.  It was from the installers, and the certificate does say that it is 'not conclusive evidence' and they had notified the local authority Building Regulations on my behalf.  As I only received it Friday, I have not yet pursued it. On Thursday, as the installers said they had reinstalled and there was nothing wrong with the flue installation, and that the boiler was not working, I wrote to WB and asked them to come and repair the boiler.   During all this time I have been in contact with various people, including Citizens Advice.  I had hoped they would refer it to the Trading Standards because you cannot contact Trading Standards yourself.  I am hoping they will.  I have other serious issues to deal with.  I don't think elderly people are helped as much as they should be.   I had an email from them Friday - yesterday - demanding I deposit £200 with them before they come down to repair it. I told them I query that, and said I will consult on my consumer rights, sending copies of that to all concerned. This is their response: Thank you for your email. The £200.00 is reserved to ensure the work has been completed correctly – in the case where remedial work has been resolved, no charge will be taken. This is due to the amount of calls we have reattended in the past where remedial work has been said to have been completed but hasn’t been. If the issues detailed in the report from our previous visit have been issued, the money will not process and will simply go from reserved back to the customers account without ever leaving it. Under our Terms and Conditions: 6.1 Assignment and Subcontracting. We may at any time and without any notice to you assign, transfer, charge, subcontract or deal in any other manner with all or any of our rights or obligations under these Terms. You may only transfer your rights or your obligations under these Terms to another person with our prior written consent, which we will not unreasonably withhold or delay. Please refer to our website for full terms and conditions." Can they demand the money up front like this?   It is a week's state pension.  Would anyone give a whole week's pay for something which should be under guarantee?  I can copy and paste the various reports I have had from Worcester Bosch, including the one of 10/2021 when it was installed and failed 24 hours later.  The boiler worked until November 2023.  Also, I cannot understand the terms and conditions, because the boiler was given under the ECO3 scheme.  I have been on disability benefit - DLA - since 1992 and I don't remember signing anything with Worcester Bosch.  I am not sure if I am allowed to attach all the correspondence here.  It will take time, because the page keeps being unresponsive and I have to keep clicking 'wait'
  • 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

Unilodgers did not provide Cashback Voucher - launched scottish simple procedure claim.


Recommended Posts

Hello,

I signed up for student accommodation via Unilodgers.

As part of them referring me to the student accommodation provider they were supposed to provide me with a £100 cashback voucher.

I tried contacting them several times and they did not respond or just said there was a "delay".

Just by checking their reviews on the internet no one seems to ever get these vouchers.

I have sent them a pre-action letter and they did not respond.

Deadline was in September.

I have attached that letter.

My next steps will be to file a simple procedure form (I live in Scotland, they are located in England).

I had already prepared everything and then clicked on submit but it seems the fee is £110 instead of £20?

From the FAQs I can read that this is because it is not solely a claim for money but for something else.

Can I submit the claim as "To pay the following sum of money to the claimant:" instead of "To deliver the following items to the claimant:" (i.e. the Cashback voucher) which would trigger the lower fee?

I am willing to lose £20 but not £110.

Thank you!

 

This is what I had prepared to the simple claims form:

Why does this court have jurisdiction?

I ticked "The events took place in the sheriff court’s district" and "Other" and wrote: "The pursuer resides at XXXXX, this court accordingly has jurisdiction."

What is the background to the claim?

The background to this claim revolves around a booking (Booking ID: XXXXX) made with Unilodgers Inc. for student accommodation at XXXXX in XXXXX on 30 June 2022.

The claimant, XXXXXl, availed a cashback offer of £100 as per Unilodgers' terms.

The claimant submitted the required form to redeem the cashback on 16 November 2022, with an understanding that it would be processed within 3 months.

However, as of the date of this claim, more than 10 months have passed without the claimant receiving the promised cashback voucher despite multiple attempts to communicate with Unilodgers Inc.

The claimant issued a pre-action letter on 8 August 2023, providing a final opportunity for Unilodgers Inc. to fulfill the cashback offer within 30 days, failing which legal action will be initiated.

Does this claim relate to a consumer credit agreement?  No.

What steps have been taken, if any, to try to settle the dispute with the respondent?

Several steps have been taken by the claimant to settle the dispute with Unilodgers Inc.

The claimant initially communicated the issue through various channels, including emails (XXXXX) and the WhatsApp business account (XXXXX).

The claimant also submitted inquiries and reminders on 15 February 2023, 15 March 2023, 22 March 2023, 14 April 2023, 8 May 2023, and 29 July 2023.

Despite these attempts, there was no response from Unilodgers Inc.

The claimant issued a pre-action letter on 8 August 2023, setting a deadline of 7 September 2023 for the receipt of the cashback voucher or the initiation of legal action.

The claimant also provided an alternative option for Unilodgers Inc. to transfer the cashback value to specified bank details.

There was no resolution from Unilodgers Inc.

 

Would you like the court to formally serve this Claim Form on your behalf?   Yes

If the claim is successful, what orders would you like the court to make?

"To compel the respondent to deliver the promised cashback voucher worth £100."

Alternatively, if the respondent does not deliver the items or do the things ordered,
to pay the following sum of money to the claimant:

£100

I also ticked "To pay expenses to the claimant."

Pre-Action Letter_Letter of Intent to Sue Unilodgers 8 Aug 2023 (1).pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Unilodgers did not provide Cashback Voucher - launched scottish simple procedure claim.

your issue here is you sent a letter of claim but didn't follow through.

but theres a get out... the pre action protocol doesn't apply in scotland anyway...

it IS a claim for money..£100.

use the online system

WWW.SCOTCOURTS.GOV.UK

Simple; making a claim

 

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

Hi, thank you!

Yes, I didn't follow through as I did not have time. 

I did use the online system. So is this incorrect in the simple procedure claim:

If the claim is successful, what orders would you like the court to make?

"To compel the respondent to deliver the promised cashback voucher worth £100."

Alternatively, if the respondent does not deliver the items or do the things ordered,
to pay the following sum of money to the claimant:

£100

The above triggers the £110 fee.

Should I instead select "To pay the following sum of money to the claimant" and enter £100? This would trigger the £20 fee. But am I entitled to receive the monetary value instead of just the voucher?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep cant keep saying 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

Posted (edited)

Apologies, this is the first time I am doing this so I wanted to make sure it is right.

Do I add the court fee (£20) to the claim for money as well (so that it's £120 in the end)?

The MoneyClaim Online guide shows that the court fee is added automatically to the claim amount but the Simple Procedure website doesn't show that.

Citizens Advice states the following:

"If the value of your claim is:

up to £300 - no expenses can be awarded 

more than £300 but less than or equal to £1,500 - the expenses awarded by the sheriff may not exceed £150 

more than £1,500 but less than or equal to £3,000 - the expenses awarded by the sheriff may not exceed 10% of the value of the claim."

Does that apply to the court fee as well?

Edited by halgaa
Link to post
Share on other sites

scotland is far far diff to advice for E&W court system.

£100 debt +  court fees. is acceptable

see the SPC Guide on the scot.gov website it goes thru it step by step.

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

Hi, I am just posting here to say that I will be waiting for a bit before submitting the claim.

Their website has been down for at least a week now (and it's probably been much longer) and I don't know if they're gone for good.

They're still registered as a company in the UK but they're US based and all the key people sit in India.

I'm surprised because this company has existed for years but I guess it doesn't make much sense to go after something that doesn't exist?

Also, their UK registered office address is a WeWork shared office space.

I suspect they don't have any staff here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Their website is back up so I assume they didn't go bust - based on this 

On 08/01/2024 at 19:21, halgaa said:

Also, their UK registered office address is a WeWork shared office space.

Does it even make sense to pursue this? Like will I get anywhere? I assume they won't pay out willingly?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfect, is everything else that I put into the form before okay? If yes, I'll get it submitted tomorrow. Thanks!

Is this correct?

Do I tick the box below for interest?

I have no option to explain that it is a cashback voucher I was due, other than before.

Thanks!

 

Screenshot 2024-01-25 at 10.26.15 pm.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

it is a monetary claim NOT a voucher ...you dont need to explain.

sadly in Scotland on a £100 sum it's peanuts as it only runs from the last day of service.

unlike E&W whereby the interest runs from the date the sum should have been 1st paid.

even if you tick it, it only worth 2p per day...:lol: 

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

Perfect, thanks, so it doesn't matter then. 

I have ticked the expenses box as well, although it seems for this sum they normally won't have to pay expenses unless the judge decides so.

Will get it submitted tonight!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, just heard back from the court and the claim was rejected. This is the reason given: 

Quote

Your Simple Procedure Claim has been rejected for the following reason: Your reason for XXXX Sheriff Court having jurisdiction of ''The claimant currently resides at XXXX. On 16 November 2022 the claimant resided at XXXX. This court accordingly has jurisdiction.'' does not appear to be a valid basis for this Court having jurisdiction.

Not sure what went wrong, I'm in Scotland, Unilodgers is based in England. I gave them two addresses that were both in the same city, my current one and the one where I lived when I filled out the cashback form. Any advice please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

then use MCOL and an N510 form.

dx

 

 

N510.pdf

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

You don't need N510 your not issuing the claim out of jurisdiction

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I do that, would I have to attend a hearing in England? What court would I choose anyway?

Would it potentially make sense to resubmit the simple procedure claim explaining this is a consumer agreement (if it is)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can opt for without a hearing and your claim will  e decided on your submitted statement and evidence. Your claim is not complex but you should adopt the pre action protocol first pursuant to the English Civil Procedure Rules IE letter before claim.

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

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...