Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Boris Johnson has vowed to challenge the shock court order against him for an unpaid debt – despite it apparently being unresolved for six months. Such judgments are issued in England and Wales when there has been a failure to repay a debt when “the court has formally decided that you owe the money,” according to a government website.   The controversy comes as the prime minister faces multiple inquiries, including by the parliamentary commissioner for standards over a luxury £15,000 Christmas holiday in the Caribbean and the bill of up to £200,000 for his lavish flat refurbishment and touting for donations for his latest lustchilds nappies     Quote(s) of the day “I’m sure Boris Johnson can clear his £535 debt – he can just ask whichever Tory donor paid for all his wallpaper.” Dave McLadd “Boris Johnson said: ‘I believe that we all owe a massive debt to our nurses.’ … When he pays this debt off, he can pay that debt off too and give them a proper pay rise.” Angela Raynor   and what was it Thatcher said about household and National budgeting?
    • I'm very troubled by this proposed particulars of claim – mainly because it is far too detailed. I'm always very much in favour of a minimum particulars of claim which give as few hints and cues to the defendant as possible so that there is a greater likelihood that they will disclose interesting information in their defence. I have to say that I've been thinking about this for some time and I'm finding it difficult to come up with a suitable form of words – but I do think that what you're proposing here is not what is needed and effectively amounts to throwing in everything including the kitchen sink.
    • Hi,   Any more tweaks needed before I drop this off at the post box?   Thanks n244 edited.pdf
    • In breach of contract and their statutory duty to the claimant, the defendant acted unfairly in that they: ·       Have not acted in accordance with GDPR regulations as you did not discuss your concerns with me before the CIFAS marker was applied ·       Have not carried out a full and sufficient investigation as found by the Financial Ombudsman service dated 12th November 2019 ·       Failed to demonstrate enough to apply for the CIFAS marker as found by Financial Ombudsman service dated 12th November 2019 ·       Acted Irresponsibly by not recognising “a sudden increase in spending”, (No previous transactions on the account) and “a payment to a new Payee”. ·       Have not acted in compliance to discuss their concerns with me before the CIFAS marker was applied acknowledged by Tesco themselves ·       Have failed to follow their own internal process and procedures as in normal in these cases ·       Have not complied with their data protection obligations as found by Information Commissioner's Office dated 3RD July 2020 ·       Failed to meet their obligations under the GDPR in this specific case with regard to fairness and transparency, prior to the CIFAS marker being initially applied ·       Failed to communicate to the claimant in that The Claimant was unaware of the CIFAS marker for 2 years ·       Failure to communicate to the claimant giving no opportunity for the Claimant to defend allegations or assist with any enquires or allow the Claimant to report to the Police ·       Failed to meet the National Fraud Database Principles in particular those below: * Principle 3: Transparency - Subjects have a right to know how data will be used and how any decisions related to them have been made. * Principle 4: Lawfulness (Searching and filing) - Subjects must only be searched and filed if they have been legally informed of how their data may be used via a Fair Processing Notice * Principle 4: Lawfulness (Standard of Proof) - Cases filed to the National Fraud Database must be supported by evidence and meet the ‘four pillars’ of the Standard of Proof. The Standard of Proof Pillar 2 has not been met: That the evidence must be clear, relevant and rigorous such that the member could confidently report the conduct of the Subject to the police.
    • Yeah l get that. I have googled him and the reviews are awful. Not that they may take reviews as evidence but based on them l dont know how he is still teaching. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 33 replies
    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

Hutchinsons 3G credit score.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5198 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

I have had problems with a Hutchinsons 3G where as the phone dosent work not even after being repaired multiple times. I eventualy got them to negotiate a fee to close the contract as they were not providing a service. It would seem the same as:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/telecoms-mobile-fixed-broadband/55384-problems-3-not-confused.html

 

I am now out of the contract and thought I had heard the last of it but...

 

I recently requested a copy of my credit report from Experian Credit Expert, check credit rating, credit reports & file alerts - with Experian CreditExpert.co.uk who showed me that Hutchinsons 3G have put a negative "unpaid debt" for the past 9 months.

 

How would I go about geting this changed as it means I cant get credit anywhere.

 

Thanks,

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't mean you 'can't get credit' this is always up to whatever firm you approach, who many not even use Experian! The issue is one of accuracy, do 3UK still consider you owe them? If so, it is this you need to challenge (with 3UK) and then ensure they remove the flag from their CRA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Three don't know what they want. I settled my debt about 6 months ago and I said "if I make this payment will I be free from any further payments, charges or contracts" and she (indian call center manager) asured me so.

 

Never the less 3G then refered me to bailifts who kept saying they were coming round. Every month I rang them and they said they will delay it while 3G update them.

 

Eventualy they stoped when I rang the call center and gave them some more abuse.

 

I owe them nothing. My account with them says I owe them nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to ask - why are you content to accept the workd of comeone on the phone without written confirmation? You could be promised the earth, and have notihng to prove the conversation took place.

 

You mention 3G, I'm assuming you mean Hutchison 3G ((3G is available on all networks).

 

Bailiffs act for the Court. Was there a court action you lost? If not, no Bailiff can touch you. In any future dealings, forget the phone, do it in writing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...