Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • UK citizens will be subject to the same rules as other Third Country Nationals. Keir Starmer to warn of 'major disruption' risk ahead of new UK-EU border checks | ITV News WWW.ITV.COM Ministers will announce measures to try to blunt the impact of the changes, writes ITV News Deputy Political Editor Anushka Asthana. | ITV National...  
    • Oh I see! thats confusing, for some reason the terms and conditions that Evri posted in that threads witness statement are slightly different than the t&cs on packlinks website. Their one says enter into a contract with the transport agency, but the website one says enter into a contract with paclink. via website: (c) Each User will enter into a contract with Packlink for the delivery of its Goods through the chosen Transport Agency. via evri witness statement in that thread: (c) Each User shall then enter into its own contract with the chosen Transport Agency. Packlink does not have any control over, and disclaims all liability that may arise in contracts between a User and a Transport Agency I read your post at #251, so I should use the second one (and changing the screenshot in the court bundle), since I am saying I have a contract with Evri? Is that correct EDIT: Oh I understand the rest of your conversation. you're saying if I was to do this i would have to fully adjust my ws to use the consumer rights act instead of rights of third parties. In that case should I just edit the terms and stick with the third parties plan?. And potentially if needed just bring up the CRA in the hearing, as you guys did in that thread  
    • First, those are the wrong terms,  read posts 240-250 of the thread ive linked to Second donough v stevenson should be more expanded. You should make refernece to the three fold duty of care test as well. Use below as guidance: The Defendant failed its duty of care to the Claimant. As found in Donoghue v Stevenson negligence is distinct and separate to any breach of contract. Furthermore, as held in the same case there need not be a contract between the Claimant and the Defendant for a duty to be established, which in the case of the Claimant on this occasion is the Defendant’s duty of care to the Claimant’s parcel whilst it is in their possession. By losing the Claimant’s parcel the Defendant has acted negligently and breached this duty of care. As such the Claimant avers that even if it is found that the Defendant not be liable in other ways, by means of breach of contract, should the court find there is no contract between Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant would still have rise to a claim on the grounds of the Defendant’s negligence and breach of duty of care to his parcel whilst it was in the Defendant’s possession, as there need not be a contract to give rise to a claim for breach of duty of care.  The court’s attention is further drawn to Caparo Industries plc v Dickman (1990), 2 AC 605 in which a three fold test was used to determine if a duty of care existed. The test required that: (i) Harm must be a reasonably foreseeable result of the defendant’s conduct; (ii) A relationship of proximity must exist and (iii) It must be fair, just and reasonable to impose liability.  
    • Thank you. here's the changes I made 1) removed indexed statement of truth 2) added donough v Stevenson in paragraph 40, just under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 paragraph about reasonable care and skill. i'm assuming this is a good place for it? 3) reworded paragraph 16 (now paragraph 12), and moved the t&cs paragraphs below it then. unless I understood you wrong it seems to fit well. or did you want me to remove the t&cs paragraphs entirely? attached is the updated draft, and thanks again for the help. WS and court bundle-1 fourth draft redacted.pdf
  • 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
      • 162 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 PAPLOC - old 118118 Card


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 170 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

Hello all,

Had a 118 credit card.

Stopped paying around November 2021 and received a default notice dated 10th December 2021 so have gone into default as of around 24th December 2021 with a value of £752.

Account purchased by Lowell and subsequent communications ignored until a LBA weas received from Overdales.

I used the Ministry of Justice reply form not the Overdales supplied one and sent a request using wording as advised by CAG.

I have finally received a reply back dated 30th January 2024 from Overdales providing a statement which comprises the numerous monthly bills relating to the account, a default Notice and a Credit Agreement.

The Credit agreeement is made out in my name and shows a tick box with a tick in it, no signature from me which I never provided in the first place.

There is no IP address provided.

There are no hello and goodbye letters provided (though I have them from when they were originally sent) so as of now they have not provided evidence they have bought the debt.

The balance of the Overdales letter asks me to provide further evidence if I wish to "support my dispute"  and goes on to say they "May" go on to Issue a CC claim.

At this point I guess I have two options, ignore or reply.  Would be grateful for advice on the next steps if any.  Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you scan and post up what you've received from slowdales?

Slowdales are Lowlifes in house sols, so pretty much you're still dealing with Lowlifes.

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Lowell/Overdales and old 118118 Card

Uploaded the full credit agreement though I only needed to redact the first page.

Also the default notice which is two pages, only had to redact the first page.

I have not uploaded any of the card statements due to the shear volume but I would say they are a full history of the transactions from start to finish.

118 claims they do not apply any default charges but I will have a look through to see if I can spot anything.

240206 118 Agreement and Default edited for CAG.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Arh Lucas Credit Services, Change of paint but still just as useless ;)

Lowell Bought out Dr Lucas and made Overdales a trading name. 

 

Question is - Do you owe the money legitimately? Why did it break down? 

You could ignore and wait for the Claim Form and deal with it that way 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Lowell/Overdales PAPLOC - old 118118 Card

Where's the rest of the correspondence from Lowlifes and Slowdales?

What were the reasons why you defaulted?

Did you inform them and ask for help?

 

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

Since the CCA was amended to include electronic online sign ups to credit agreements, if they took it to Court, they just need to evidence that you took out the debt, have defaulted on it and they are the owners of the debt. If they issued the claim form, you would have to think how you could defend it.  You can't really say that you don't owe anything.

Did you receive a letter from the credit card provider advising that the debt had been sold on ?.  If not you could respond that you have not received any correspondence from the original creditor to advise of any change of ownership of any alleged debt. And ask them to provide a copy of the letter from the original creditor or a document that provides proof of sale to Lowell.

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

@Bazooka Boo thanks for joining.

After getting the LBA I received a document print out from Overdales consisting of the agreement and default notice as shown in my upload plus around 30 printouts of the monthly statements beginning with when the card was taken out to when it defaulted.  I have not scanned them as I did not think they contained anything useful but can if the group thinks it worthwhile, but probably about 200 pages and a lot of redacting to do.

Apart from the above there was nothing else sent.

@unclebulgaria67, thanks for input. 

Yes, I received goodbye and  hello letters.  Overdales have not provided them in the bundle nor any other proof of the sale.

The credit agreement is made out in my name and the box is ticked.  How do they, or a judge, know it was me that ticked it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bazooka Boo I defaulted because my business ran into lean times.

I was in contact with them and made some minimum payments, mainly to try and maintain my credit record but stopped when I found out that they had trashed it anyway.

Something had to give so I stopped paying them at that point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Electronic online credit agreement, so they don't need your signature or evidence who ticked the box. Judge likely to accept that you received the credit and agreed repayment.

If you want to avoid CCJ, you might want to negotiate a settlement offer.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...