Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi. Could you post up what they've sent please so we can see what the charge is? Cover up your name and address and their reference number. HB
    • I've looked through all our old NPE threads, and as far as we know they have never had the bottle to do court. There are no guarantees of course, but when it comes to put or shut up they definitely tend towards shut up. How about something like -   Dear Jonathan and Julie, Re: PCN no.XXXXX cheers for your Letter Before Claim.  I rolled around on the floor in laughter at the idea that you actually expected me to take this tripe seriously and cough up. I'll write to you not some uninterested third party, thanks all the same, because you have are the ones trying to threaten me about this non-existent "debt". Go and look up Jopson v Homeguard Services Ltd, saddos.  Oh, while you're at it, go and look up your Subject Access Request obligations - we all know how you ballsed that up way back in January to March. Dear, dear, dear - you couldn't resist adding your £70 Unicorn Food Tax, you greedy gets.  Judges don't like these made-up charges, do they? You can either drop this foolishness now or get a hell of a hammering in court.  Both are fine with me.  Summer is coming up and I would love a holiday at your expense after claiming an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). I look forward to your deafening silence.   That should show them you're not afraid of them and draw their attention to their having legal problems of their own with the SAR.  If they have any sense they'll crawl back under their stone and leave you in peace.  Over the next couple of days invest in a 2nd class stamp (all they are worth) and get a free Certificate of Posting from the post office.
    • Yes that looks fine. It is to the point. I think somewhere in the that the you might want to point out that your parcel had been delivered but clearly had been opened and resealed and the contents had been stolen
    • Hi All, I just got in from work and received a letter dated 24 April 2024. "We've sent you a Single Justice Procedure notice because you have been charged with an offence, on the Transport for London Network." "You need to tell us whether you are guilty or not guilty. This is called making your plea."
  • 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

Stevie1 v Paragon Finance **won**


stevie1
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5099 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

Had a dispute with Parangon finance who sold debt to CBS transcom, who sent it out to Arrow Global, anywany complained to trading standards and following their visit to global got back a letter containing, all references numbers pertaining to Paragon & CBS Transcom & Arrow Global

 

"We have received a visit today from the trading standards service following your request for information under consumer credit act 1974 - sections 77/79.

further to your letter, we can confirm that we will be conducting a full and thorough investigation into this matter. Pending the findings of that investigation, as a gesture of goodwill, we will be waiving the amount outstanding on this account"

 

I think that means I won, what do you all think??

 

thanks for assistance.

steve

user_online.gif

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem to me that you have!!!!

:D

Well done!!

Best wishes.

jaxads

 

Halifax - £2281, successfully refunded all charges after LBA letter & telephone call.

Have been offered the difference between the £20 and £12 charges from Capital One -- am sending LBA for remainder.

GE Money - Received settlement of £441, being total charges requested. No interest though.

CCA'd Bank of Scotland / Blair Oliver Scott to produce CCA Agreements on two Credit Cards - well in default, although still chasing payment!!!

EOS Solutions "ceased action on account" on behalf of a friend.

 

All in all, quite busy at the moment and enjoying every minute of it
:eek:

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

they never supplied documentary proof of debt, I think gave them 6 months..... never happened, just harrassing calls, told them failed to supply and wrote stating if continued to harrass would go trading standards, etc, seemed to have worked but as letter is a bit vague just wanted others impressions on its content..

 

Thanks all

Link to post
Share on other sites

"We have received a visit today from the trading standards service following your request for information under consumer credit act 1974 - sections 77/79.

further to your letter, we can confirm that we will be conducting a full and thorough investigation into this matter. Pending the findings of that investigation, as a gesture of goodwill, we will be waiving the amount outstanding on this account"

 

 

That's the only iffy bit.... :cool: . It sounds as if they are still giving themselves the option to come back at you, but are running scared at the moment.... so have tried to cover their backs just in case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

forgot to mention was for £28,000

 

steve

 

:o :D Wow!!

 

I hope we have got the right interpretation. I should imagine that would be a huge weight off your mind! I've got my fingers crossed for you.

 

Please let us know the final outcome :wink:

I'm midway through the tunnel, but getting closer to the light.

 

 

 

Please be aware that i am not an expert in anything!

I may offer an opinion, but the final decision is yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

anywany complained to trading standards
Good for you, that's the way to do it! :cool:

We have received a visit today from the trading standards service following your request for information under consumer credit act 1974 - sections 77/79
Bloody Hell!!! That must have been some complaint matey! ;)

Pending the findings of that investigation, as a gesture of goodwill, we will be waiving the amount outstanding on this account"

I think that means I won, what do you all think??

Won, Done, & Dusted!!! Keep that letter safe for at least the next 6 years, i'ld be keeping it safe forever...!!

forgot to mention, it was for £28,000
Bloody Hell!!!!! :eek: Well done you!! Congratulations on a fantastic result!

 

Release the balloons...!!!

 

ballons.jpg

 

Hearty Congratulations on a great result!

 

Best Regards, Dave. :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's absolutely marvellous Stevie.

 

Please don't abandon your fan club now - just keep us posted on any further developments.

 

I don't want to be a party pooper, but I don't like the use of the words "pending" and "waiving". I sincerely hope they have not used the words "without prejudice"?

 

Maybe someone more proficient than me could suggest an appropriate acknowledgement of the letter?

 

Trouble is I am a cynical old beggar and have learned not to trust the Brits since Wolrd War II and, even more so, the Yanks for winning it for us!

 

And, as someone elsewhere has pointed out, Transcom, Arrow, MBNA, Bank of America are all 'Sallie Mae' companies with a reputation that is, er, a tad niffy.

 

But, please Stevie, my intention is not to pee on your bonfire.

 

Trust the good luck stays with you.

 

Regards.

 

Van

Link to post
Share on other sites

no they havent used without prejudice, am waiting for trading standards to contact me, I suppose they will, and then armed with all information can glean reply. I will ask for help in producing the appropriate response.

 

everyone is cynical - its just the way of the world nowadays

 

Thanks Van

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...