Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sars request sent on 16th March and also sent a complaint separately to Studio. Have received no response. Both letters were received and signed for.  I was also told by the financial ombudsman that studio were investigating but I've also had no response to that either.  The only thing Studio have sent me is a default notice.  Any ideas of what I can do from here please 
    • Thanks Bank - I shall tweak my draft and repost. And here's today's ridiculous email from the P2G 'Claims Dept' Good Morning,  Thank you for you email. Unfortunately we would be unable to pay the amount advised in your previous email.  When you placed the order, you were asked for the value of your parcel, you stated that the value was £265.00. At this stage the booking advised that you were covered to £20.00 and to enhance this to £260.00 you could pay an extra £13.99 + VAT to fully cover your item for loss or damage during transit, you declined to fully cover your item.  Towards the end of your booking on the confirmation page, you were then offered to take cover again, to which you declined again.  Unfortunately, we would be unable to offer you an enhanced payment on this occasion.  If I can assist further, please do let me know.  Kindest Regards Claims Team and my response Good Afternoon  Do you not understand the court cases of PENCHEV v P2G (225MC852) and SMIRNOVS v P2G (27MC729)? In both cases it was held by the courts that there was no need for additional ‘cover’ or ‘protection’ (or whatever you wish to call it) on top of the standard delivery charge, and P2G were required to pay up in full for both cases, which by then also included court costs and interest. I shall be including copies of both those judgements in the bundle I submit to the court next Wednesday 1 May, unless you settle my claim (£274.10) in full before then. Tick tock…..    
    • IMG_2820-IMG_2820-merged.pdfmerged.pdf Case management was this morning. Here is the Sheriff’s order. Moved case forward to 24/05.   He said there was no signed agreement and after a bit of “erm, erm, yeah but, erm” when he asked them, he allowed time for sol to contact claimant.  what is the next step now? thank you UCM  
    • I've had a quick (well, quick for a thread of this length),  read of this thread and to be honest I'm struggling to make heads nor tails of the actual crux of the issue here. You seem awfully convinced that whatever is going on is worth the fight and the odds are in your favour but with how the thread has gone it seems that one trail goes cold so you simply move on to another in an attempt to delay the inevitable. All it does is end up digging holes and confusing others and yourself which means any advice given to you is completely pointless. I note that for the life of this thread there has not been any documentation or correspondence uploaded for people to have a look. Have you got any that you'd be willing to redact and upload for members to assist you? Right now, it seems people are shooting out advice while being in the dark because it's starting to become very difficult for people who weren't here at the start of this (including myself) to follow along. Right now, this whole thread is just hypothetical "He said, she said" and is going nowhere fast. Nothing more than basic advice can be given which, as you've sought out some legal advice, is likely not sufficient to actually come to any sort of conclusion. I, personally, am starting to agree with others that it may be best to consider bankruptcy and put the matter behind you.  
  • 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 
        • 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

BAILIFFADVICE......An apology from HERBIE......


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6149 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

Guest Herbie

I have been posting here for quite some time offering support and assistance with bailiff problems, and, as so many of you know that we legally have details of the names of all certificated bailiffs, we receive either pm's or telephone enquiries from viewers to this site requesting a search of our database to establish whether or not a bailiff is certificated. This is particulary helpful to viewers if the courts are not open for them to check for themselves......always assuming that you know which court to apply to !!

 

For obvious reasons,we always urge that a bailiff's name is NOT put on the site.

 

The reason for this post is that; after returning from a 10 day break, we have received many messages concerning the fact that some of you have had their entire posts deleted from this site because they contained a link to our web site that has recently been set up with the sole intention of helping with all bailiff issues. Unfortunatly, with the exception of the Lawpacks detailed on this site, CAG wlll not allow any links to either our site, or apparently any other site.

 

Thank you to everyone who was kind enough to put a link to our site, but this is not allowed.

 

From your messages,it would appear that many of you were offended, and I apologise..........Herbie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

And fourthly, I think I have another case for Herbie coming up which she would very much like...

 

Whilst it might be NOT PC to name and shame individuals it seems to be okay to name and shame companies and quote the names of companie employees. Why not have an "only name company and job title of person" policy....

Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone or any site that highlights the wrongdoings of bailiffs is fantastic in my view. It should also be noted that certain links have been allowed ie tom brennan post and moneysavingexpert etc. If a site helps then I would ask that an admin approves the site we are referring to as approved. Any website that aids us as consumers should surely be allowed to link, the information could be invaluable and save someone from losing their home and possessions. Please reconsider admin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

herbie I am not a star, I always say things how I see them. I have never been onto the site you are part of, pm me a link please. I am all for the betterment and defense of all consumers. The more information we have then then better armed we are to defend ourselves against DCA, landlords, banks, retailers and blasted bailiffs. They threatened to knock on my door not so long ago. I just smiled, 6ft 4, parachute regt trained and two german shepherds, I looked fwd to their visit, alas it was a no show!

 

I would also like to add that there has to be rules on this site regarding links. If they were not in place then we would get links for allsorts like penis enlargement etc, not that I need that ofcourse, ahem. However I am certain that admins could approve a site that is relative to this one to give our members access to more indepth advice on a particular subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites

herbie I am not a star, I always say things how I see them. I have never been onto the site you are part of, pm me a link please. I am all for the betterment and defense of all consumers. The more information we have then then better armed we are to defend ourselves against DCA, landlords, banks, retailers and blasted bailiffs. They threatened to knock on my door not so long ago. I just smiled, 6ft 4, parachute regt trained and two german shepherds, I looked fwd to their visit, alas it was a no show!

 

I would also like to add that there has to be rules on this site regarding links. If they were not in place then we would get links for allsorts like penis enlargement etc, not that I need that ofcourse,(ah like father like son) ahem. However I am certain that admins could approve a site that is relative to this one to give our members access to more indepth advice on a particular subject.

 

You have some valid points there calvi36 ,and Herbie keep up the good work;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just viewed the website and I am not convinced as to why you would wish to link here. You are a private company offering an 090 premium rate number to access downloads, nominal rate being £6.00. I now state that I cannot suggest for one moment that CAG authorises your link as this premium rate number puts those who may face bailiffs at a further disadvantage by ringing a premium rate number. I cannot accept that this could ever be a valid CAG link when a money making scheme is in operation. You openly state that you are a company. If you wish to offer advice free on CAG or to CAG memebrs without them having to visit your site then ofcourse you are welcome. Otherwise I would back the admins 100% in removing your link.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason for this post is that; after returning from a 10 day break, we have received many messages concerning the fact that some of you have had their entire posts deleted from this site because they contained a link to our web site that has recently been set up with the sole intention of helping with all bailiff issues. Unfortunatly, with the exception of the Lawpacks detailed on this site, CAG wlll not allow any links to either our site, or apparently any other site.

 

That is quite incorrect.

 

I think you'll find that links to CAB, CCCS and many others are allowed.

 

CAG does not allow commercial links, links to sites where the advice may be dubious, etc... The company to which you refer charges for the download of documents, and therefore comes under the heading of commercial links. The matter has been discussed at Admin level, and the removal of the links was as a consequence of that discussion.

 

Edit: Sorry, Calvi, I obviously type more slowly than you. ;-)

 

.

.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is quite incorrect.

 

I think you'll find that links to CAB, CCCS and many others are allowed.

 

CAG does not allow commercial links, links to sites where the advice may be dubious, etc... The company to which you refer charges for the download of documents, and therefore comes under the heading of commercial links. The matter has been discussed at Admin level, and the removal of the links was as a consequence of that discussion.

 

Edit: Sorry, Calvi, I obviously type more slowly than you. ;-)

 

.

.

.

 

It's ok Booky, if I had, had the link before I would not have posted at all however I stick by my previous posts, if a link is to the benefit of us all and is not profit making then so be it. If it is profit making then gtf, we have enough issues to deal with without being taken for a ride by someone piggy backing onto cag to make money. If you want to chase an ambulance, find a hospital and enjoy your run!

Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading the last couple of posts,i still say a lot of people have benefitted from Herbie's (FREE) advice.

With regards to a premium number for downloadable info then sorry that's not on.

As for the link yes it had to be removed as some parts of the site are for commercial gain.saying that there is a lot of free info on it.

CAG has rules and yes on this occasion it was broken with the link,so i have to agree with the mods.

setmefree

 

Thanks to calvi36 for correcting me

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Herbie

Calvi & Bookworm.

 

This is being most unfair. Let me say right now that the site has been seen by many bailiff companies and the heads of bailiff companies also, and some have suggested minor changes and offered further information on the charging strcture etc. To date, with the execption of CAG we have not received one single complaint.......So I do not think that Bookworms mention of .......advice being ducious.....is either right or fair.

 

To clarify, the site offers over 90 individual pages of helpful advice. Due entirely to the vast amount of time spent on reasearch, we are making a very NOMINAL charge of JUST £6 to download cetain documents. When solicitors are charging a fee of AT LEAST £100 just for an initial visit, I would challenge anyone who thinks our nominal fee is unfair. You may wish to note that 36 firms of solictors have downloaded a copies of the fee scale for Council Tax and Road Traffic debts....so that must say something of the knowledge that many solicitors have on bailiff matters....

 

However, my main concern, is that just yesterday on this same site BankFodder is advertising a legal pack for sale at £11.59 (including postage) entitled "Fight a Motoring Ticket Kit". This provides materials, templates and a CD Rom and come from a firm by the name of Geoffrey Miller Solicitors ......not a charity....I will say no more.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a point of correction at all setmefree, you believed what you had seen my friend, I think you were deliberately misguided on this one. Am actually so glad I found this company's website and was able to delve a bit deeper. I know for a fact you do not support the use of premium rate numbers nor commercial latch ons to CAG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Calvi & Bookworm.

 

This is being most unfair. Let me say right now that the site has been seen by many bailiff companies and the heads of bailiff companies also, and some have suggested minor changes and offered further information on the charging strcture etc. To date, with the execption of CAG we have not received one single complaint.......So I do not think that Bookworms mention of .......advice being ducious.....is either right or fair. ( Whether you believe this to be fair or not is not the issue here, the issue is that you represent a commercial enterprise, for gain) This site operates in a non profit manner for the good and defence of all.

 

To clarify, the site offers over 90 individual pages of helpful advice. Due entirely to the vast amount of time spent on reasearch, we are making a very NOMINAL charge (that's the word that says bye bye)of JUST £6 to download cetain documents. ( Could be £6.00 could be £600.00, why charge at all if you have the documents and you are fully aware that people are in dire straits?) When solicitors are charging a fee of AT LEAST £100 just for an initial visit, ( Advice on CAG is free, if someone wins a case they are free to donate or not to, no charges are levied.)I would challenge anyone who thinks our nominal fee is unfair. (I would definitely challenge you on this, a charge compared to a free service is let's face it totally bloody ridiculous. It is not unfair to your company, course not, you make money from it, it is unfair to charge for the information and advice FREELY AVAILABLE from this site) You may wish to note that 36 firms of solictors have downloaded a copies of the fee scale for Council Tax and Road Traffic debts ( About time they actually learned what charges they were allowed to put on us!)....so that must say something of the knowledge that many solicitors have on bailiff matters....

 

However, my main concern, is that just yesterday on this same site BankFodder is advertising a legal pack for sale at over £11 entitled "Fight a Motoring Ticket Kit". This provides materials, templates and a CD Rom and come from a firm of Solicitors......not a charity....I will say no more.....( This site has to be paid for, the packs available are again non profit, unlike your site, this site does not have a premium rate number to justify it's existence, this site is able to run through contributions not some profit making 75p to £1.75 a minute phone number.)[/quote]

 

 

Thank you admins for spotting this one. Piggy back, try lie back and reap the profits from the needy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Calvi & Bookworm.

 

So I do not think that Bookworms mention of .......advice being ducious.....is either right or fair.

 

Please re-read my post, I said OR, citing examples, and clearly established that yours was because of the commercial link.

 

As for the prices you charge, I didn't say anything about being fair, I said CAG doesn't allow links to commercial sites.

 

However, my main concern, is that just yesterday on this same site BankFodder is advertising a legal pack for sale at over £11 entitled "Fight a Motoring Ticket Kit". This provides materials, templates and a CD Rom and come from a firm of Solicitors......not a charity....I will say no more.....

 

Incorrect.

CAG purchases the Lawpacks and resells them at a slight profit so as to cover CAG's running costs, since the level of donations is far from sufficient. We're fast reaching the 150 000 users, and have an average 800 people on the forum at all times, and it takes a lot of money to keep a forum that size running smoothly, to keep giving FREE information and support.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Herbie

Many of you will also know that we have provide FREE links to the downloads in cases where it is clear that someone cannot pay £6. And we have done this many times also to members of the public.....and will always do so.

 

Can the same be said for the Motoring Ticket Kit. I somehow doubt it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of you will also know that we have provide FREE links to the downloads in cases where it is clear that someone cannot pay £6. And we have done this many times also to members of the public.....and will always do so.

 

Can the same be said for the Motoring Ticket Kit. I somehow doubt it.

 

 

Could you post the links to a mod for clarification that it is FREE? If you offer a free service then I would like to see it. I would also like to see how you fund your free site. If it is from your 090 number then it is not so much a free service but an add on to hook people into your regular site.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Herbie

Thank you Bookworm. I fully appreciate that business do need money to survive. Mine does in the same way as yours. As debt advisers we have helped near on 800 individuals in the past 6 years. We have just 14 clients that pay a small fee.

 

Mindful of the need to finance this site, our company offered to pay a fee to Consumer Action Group if links were allowed, but you are very well aware that this was refused by the moderators !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would have been refused by moderators. If you had taken the time to read the site rules, you would have seen that no commercial interests shall interfere with the running of the site. Let me make it clear herbie, what you are attempting to do is to jump on the back of CAG, which is free to all that need it, we do not need private companies offering the same types of service and charging for the service that is FREE here. There is a wealth of knowledge on this site, FREE to all that require it. Your service is NOT free and therefore your link could never be allowed whether or not you offered to pay for it to be linked. Try google ads, they will take yyou onboard at around 10p per click to your website. I have been at odds with mods a cpl of times on CAG and this has always been resolved regarding the rules of the site. Thank you mods and admin for getting this one 100% correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because that would be against the ethos of CAG.

 

For clarification, since your sentence could be misinterpreted, CAG is not my site, not even partially, it is Dave's and Bankfodder's. I am only one of the unpaid volunteers.

 

Bottom line is, no outside commercial links are allowed on CAG. You can argue your side any way you like, that won't change a thing. I only came on the thread because you were making some incorrect statements, and I wasn't prepared to let those stand.

 

Edit: Calvi, stop typing faster than me, damnit! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6149 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...