Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Received a call and follow on confirmation email from the police about my cabinets! They wanted to confirm that I was prepared to support police action for the matter and that I would be happy to provide a statement and attend court at a later date!!! I think that something might actually get done - it won't get my cabinets back I know that but hopefully it will put a stop to this so called courier doing this to people!
    • Around a month ago I had to send a sympathy card to a friend in GB. Logistically it made sense to buy a personalised one on eBay and get it sent straight to my mate, rather than faffing around getting it sent to me.  This mighty purchase set me back all of £3.05 (including postage costs). I was taken aback that, when it was sent, I got a tracking number.  For a flippin' three-quid card!  I had no idea that technology had moved on so much and that tracking was so easy.  The shop has feedback for 16,300 purchases so tracking must be easy & automatic. It's unlikely your case will get to court, but in cases that do this got me thinking that we need to aggressively challenge the PPCs where they have lied about the timescales of sending their rubbish and have no proof at all of posting - when it would be so easy to provide it.
    • Thanks for uploading the appeal.  It was a waste of time but well done in not outing the driver. Why have your friends paid £60 they don't owe to a cowboy private company that have no means of making them pay as they don't do court?  If they paid by card, as I presume they did, they should get on to their bank and do a chargeback immediately. We call the £70 the Unicorn Food Tax.  The law specifically states they are only allowed to charge the original £100 but the PPCs and their bezzies in their trade associations allow this made-up extra £70 so £100 becomes £170.  Unfortunately for them the law doesn't. Anyway, snotty letter time. There is an example in post 32 here you can tweak as it's the same company but a different car park   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/463964-alliance-anpr-pcn-lease-car-appeals-refused-daymer-bay-cornwall/page/2/#comments  
    • Thank god you're not a part of the tribunal! Terribly biased and negative.  HR isn't all knowing. And this case proves it. Thanks again for your opinion.  I'm not going to court because of a few emails, I'm going to court because the head of HR has invented a PCP solely for me, which no other employee is made to sit. The language used in the emails is discriminatory and inflammatory.   
  • 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

DCAs who send out Statutory Demands purely as a punitive measure / scare tactic


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5416 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 would be really keen to have all your thoughts on this, i've noticed that more and more agencies are adopting this strategy. I'm about to embark on some work in the day job centered around this and would love to hear opinions and thoughts, especially if it has happened to you.

 

Thanks

 

Seq :)

 

ps - i don't work for a debt collection agency before you ask!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sequenci, pleased to see that you have been "upgraded" to a site helper. You know your stuff! ;)

Can't say that I am able in this instance to help with your research, as I do not believe that I have been a lucky (!) recipient!, but does a Statutory demand come as a letter from the DCA/solicitor, and what sort of wording?

Red

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sequenci,

 

 

It would seem from reading many threads on this site, that this is a particular tactic of Ruthbridge. Unfortunately (or rather fortunately) I have not had any personal dealings with this particular company.

 

I have, however had dealings with DG solicitors. These usually send a letter threatening legal action in the first instance. If this letter is ignored, or a payment is not forthcoming, then a second letter threatening legal action and application for an attachment of earnings is then sent. Now should you ignore this second letter, they then send the next letter threatening legal action and an application for a charging order. This is the stage I am currently at, so I do not yet know what the fourth threatening letter may contain!:confused:

 

 

Regards, Jeff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had 2 from Connaught.

 

Also had 1 from Lowell sent a week after they issued a CCJ claim but before judgement.

 

What sort of info do you need.

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Now should you ignore this second letter, they then send the next letter threatening legal action and an application for a charging order.

 

 

If, at the time that you take out a loan, this the intention of a loan company should you default, then shouldn't the interest rate be that of a secured loan rather than an unsecured loan, since they intend to get the outstanding balance + charges secured against your house if you default.

 

I don't see the difference between a secured loan & what they are doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

. Now should you ignore this second letter, they then send the next letter threatening legal action and an application for a charging order.

 

how do they know if you own a property?

post office WON 12/11/06

 

abbey.LBA sent 30/10/06.MCOL claim submitted 8/11/06.allocation questionnaire sent 16/12/06.schedule of charges sent 16/12/06.WON

 

2nd abbey claim SAR sent 3/1/07.WON.complaint letter sent 18/1/08

 

alliance and Leicester.WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meritforce make me laugh, they threaten to seize my assets (haven't got any) arrestment of wages (I don't earn any) and bankruptcy (what, for 200 odd quid??) yeh right!:razz:

 

 

 

 

They can only start bankruptcy proceedings for £750 or more!

 

 

Jeff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never received a SD so can't comment from that point of view, but I think it's essential to get that SAR and CCA request in as early as possible and start disputing the debt.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have ignored all my SDs up to now as I feel any contact could be taken as acknowledgement of service.

 

I am still here and kicking.

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have ignored all my SDs up to now as I feel any contact could be taken as acknowledgement of service.

 

I am still here and kicking.

 

 

Hello Belaflat,

 

 

Could you elaborate?

 

How many SD's have you had? How long ago? From which companies?

 

 

Sorry for all the questions!

 

 

Best wishes, Jeff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had 3 in total, 1 from Lowells and 2 from Connaught.

Connaught sent the first in the form of a simple letter which stated it was a statutory demand etc etc, this was over a year ago.

The second from Connaught was the type which everyone seems to be getting from them, A4, stapled together with little blue triangle and delivered by 2nd class mail and followed up 2 weeks later with a 'Time is running out, contact us now to resolve this' letter.

 

I would add that I have had no contact whatsoever with Connaught so these were total shots in the dark as they have also tried to contact me at 2 other addresses.

 

I will PM details of Lowells as I am in dispute with them at the minute and dont want to give too many details.

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...
I have had 3 in total, 1 from Lowells and 2 from Connaught.

Connaught sent the first in the form of a simple letter which stated it was a statutory demand etc etc, this was over a year ago.

The second from Connaught was the type which everyone seems to be getting from them, A4, stapled together with little blue triangle and delivered by 2nd class mail and followed up 2 weeks later with a 'Time is running out, contact us now to resolve this' letter.

 

I would add that I have had no contact whatsoever with Connaught so these were total shots in the dark as they have also tried to contact me at 2 other addresses.

 

I will PM details of Lowells as I am in dispute with them at the minute and dont want to give too many details.

 

Hi

 

I have just had a stat demand from Connaught today....exactly the same with the blue triangle....2nd class post,.....

 

 

Im sending them a letter tomorrow for the deed of assignment....

 

Have they chased you anymore with the stat demand????

 

Also my stat demand has come in my maiden name....you think they would get my name right

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they real stat demands, or just threats of them?

 

Those things cost about £150 to issue, to seems an expensive tactic if they're using the scattergun approach. Also, if you issue one and don't follow it through with a BR petition, you lose a lot of credibility with the debtor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you'll find most "stautory demands" are just sent by post. Then again, even a stat demand served by a process server isn't all that expensive. First link you find on internet search is £45 fixed fee.

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they real stat demands, or just threats of them?

 

Those things cost about £150 to issue, to seems an expensive tactic if they're using the scattergun approach. Also, if you issue one and don't follow it through with a BR petition, you lose a lot of credibility with the debtor.

 

I think they are real.....I found a copy of them on the internet....They look scary when you get one...

Link to post
Share on other sites

LLoydspain, in order for a statutory demand to be real, it needs to be personally served on the debtor UNLESS a court has allowed substituted service.

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

LLoydspain, in order for a statutory demand to be real, it needs to be personally served on the debtor UNLESS a court has allowed substituted service.

 

So the one i got through the post today 2nd class is not real?????

 

Connaught ...would not have gone via the court to get it to me...First I hear they were going to do this to me was last week...a threat...now they have sent me rule 6.1 stat deman 268

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stat demands must be served by personal service unless a court has ordered substituted service.

 

personally, though, i would always issue a set aside application, since they are free and removes any risk at all.

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had one of these from connaughts, Served them a CCA request, Got the standard reply ''Its being passed back to the orginal creditor'' 1st credit then have a bash at making me pay, Sent a CCA to them, They also confirmed they didnt have it, They were passing it back to HBOS (Who they claim they were acting for), Then Robinson Way come out of the woodwork, Same threats as the other 2 (They also told me on the phone that if i did send a CCA request they would refuse to issue it as they were 100% sure that 1st credit had sent one and thats all the proof they needed), I just laughed and hung up as i already knew that 1st Credit didnt have one. So i sent a CCA request to Robinson Way and heard nothing since. Been about 5-6 months now.

 

All the above were reported for non-compliance to CCA requests. I wonder if they dare try again...

 

i wouldnt have managed all of the above without the help of CAG and its members..

The views expressed on this website are mine alone and don't reflect the views of my employer!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...