Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • quite honestly id email shiply CEO with that crime ref number and state you will be taking this to court, for the full sum of your losses, if it is not resolved ASAP. should that be necessary then i WILL be naming Shiply as the defendant. this can be avoided should the information upon whom the courier was and their current new company contact details, as the present is simply LONDON VIRTUAL OFFICES  is a company registered there and there's a bunch of other invisible companies so clearly just a mail address   
    • If it doesn’t sell easily : what they can get at an auction becomes fair market price, which may not realise what you are hoping.
    • Thank you. The receiver issue is a rabbit hole I don't think I'm going to enjoy going down. These people seem so protected. And I don't understand how or why?  Fair market value seems to be ever shifting and contentious.
    • Hungary is attempting to be a world power in manufacturing electric vehicle batteries, despite locals' reservations.View the full article
    • You can't, but you can (and really should) bring up the point that the lender isn't meeting their legal obligations in selling the property for fair market value. You'll have to do this in court, though. A receiver is bought in by the lender, not you. If they're a registered insolvency practitioner, you may be able to raise a complaint to the insolvency service but there are no guarantees here. Many receivers are also registered with the RICS and self-regulate so if you know the name of the receiver you can check there, again no guarantees. https://www.rics.org/surveyor-careers/career-development/accreditations/registered-property-receivership-scheme
  • 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

next directory


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6202 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 think the first thing you need to do is establish if a credit agreement existed. You need to request a copy of this under the consumer credit act. This will cost you £1. You also need to find out if there were any charges levied on your account, make this request under the data protection act Subject Access Request. Once you have this information you may at least be able to claim back any charges. I have received confirmation that there is no agreement on my wifes account and am looking at getting the debt dropped as it is unenforceable. Now this is where i get a bit foggy but i know someone will know more, but i think you may be able to reclaim what you have paid as the debt was unenforceable. If i am wrong you have my apologies. Good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but could someone explain this a little more as I have a CCJ put on me by Next for the measly sum of £175. I have been instructed to pay £50 per month to pay it off which I cannot afford and despite the lovely guy in the court bailiff office ( I know, contradiction in terms for bailiffs but the guys in my local area really DO help people) cannot understand why this has happened as he was with me when I filled in the forms before Christmas to state the above.

 

Please could someone advise, eternally grateful xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have just read a thread on here entitled next defualt removal, and wondered if that was an option i could look into.

 

both me and my partner had accounts with next which went to dca's. both accounts are now settled in full but we have defaults. neither of us ever received a default notice, i would have kept it if we had.

 

is is wise to send a similar letter as the one on the other thread?

 

PS these accounts were settled last year

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends what type of accounts that went into default - those regulated by the CCA require a default notice to be issued, if you didn't receive one, complete with instructions on how to bring the account into order, you can appeal.

 

However, if it was a non-CCA default, these are totally unregulated and the firm can say you are in default and flag your credit record as such. The bad news is if the 'default' was correct, then this is a different issue from still owing the money - it will show as being 'satisfied', but the default flag will remain until it drops off (after 6 years).

 

I'm sure you'll agree that this is a scandal, especially if lenders and CRAs treat these non-formal defaults with as much distrain as a full blown CCJ. However, most firms using this tool see it as a way of retribution, and will not remove their self-imposed blight on your record. The only (currently) available recourse is to take them to the Sheriff Court and demand its removal - which can be done under the Small Claims track.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think these are CCA-based, unless it's got a whopping credit limit! So there's no harm in writing to them notig that the account is cleared ('satisfied') and ask nicely to remove the default, as you understand some lenders are mistaking these for CCJ defaults (true). They can only say yes or no!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They are a catalogue and they are covered by the CCA, albeit as with most catalogues you never sign an agreement. There's a thought, if it is an unenforcable agreement can you be defaulted on it. Someone with far more brains than me to answer that.

 

SAR them and find out how much they whacked you for in charges en route to the DCA. Reclaim it back from them, but now that your accounts are settled, while reclaiming your money put the removal of the default in the Prelim and LBA's too. Its a very slim chance theyre gonna go to court to argue about it.

 

Good Luck

If you can read this, thank a teacher.

If you can read it in english thank a soldier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...