email FAO: The PARTNERS mail@jacobsbailiffs.co.uk URGENT COMPLAINT Ref: Dear Sir/Madam I am writing to you with an urgent complaint I have regarding your companies behavoiur on the above account. I entered into an agreement to pay £60 per month towards a council tax liability order - since entering into this agreement I have not missed a payment yet your company insisted on increasing the payment to £100 again I paid this with diligence. However, I recieved a letter on the XX/XX/XX informing me my agreement had been cancelled and that payment would now increase to £140 - there is no reason for this to happen a

Stage 1 - Shock and Awe: Scare the proverbial out of a debtor with a fire-and-brimstone letter threatening to hang, draw and quarter said debtor by sending the following. Unsuspecting debtors fall into the trap immediately. CAG members ask the Mrs what's for dinner. Stage 2 - Awe Shucks: We meant what we said you know, so you'd better contact us. Unsuspecting debtors who haven't responded will go into a flat spin and hide this letter from the other half. CAG members stick another sausage on the barbie. Stage 3 - Aw: We really, really meant it you know. Unsuspecting debtors contemplate calling the CAB. CAG members roll

you have to type a certain amount of chrs# for it to appears.. dx

If it doesn't get paid they will request the drivers details, if you do so they prosecute the driver for non payment, if you don't provide driver details they prosecute you for failing to comply. Its not 'old' legislation just older than more recent legislation which Councils have the option to use.

Fox, I might not feel the best but I hovering around.... LowWill, I know this isnt easy to do, but ignore the bugg**s, all they are doing is getting at you mentally, as has been said above, they should not have sold your account on to a DCA, while they are in dispute, and they know it, but they flowt the laws so much and get away with it all the time, I put in a 3 complaints to the FSA, one they sent a pile of papers from Crap1 had sent them to say "Well we have sent you all the documentation" when checking through, they were statements (with 2 yrs missing I might add) and a "Supposed" copy of my agreement, which was a photocopy of t

Thanks, that's most helpful. Time now for us all here to put together your initial, more formal request for your deposit to him and see if we can bring this to a close now, without the need for too much 'formality' later. I'd be inclined to keep it short and sweet to start - and simple - with, if appropriate, detail to follow later, as needed. No doubt those with more experience of deposit disputes will assist too. Look forward to catching up with you later.

you mention remortage you did sign a credit/mortage agreement or not your partner would have to sign if a joint mortage cancelation and cooling off period would come into play as well this is def a time to send an sar

Spoke to a manager at Orange a couple of days ago and they acknowledged their mistake and decided to "alter" the dates of my contract to allow me to upgrade to an iPhone 3GS. I was only in month 4 of a 18 month contract (plus 3 months as I upgraded 3 months before end of last contract). Luckily they were launching the iPhone the next day so I was able to get that. I now DO have reception so everythings good. Also I spoke to CISAS and they said they couldn't do anything as its a handset issue and they don't deal with them?? Buzby - if you had bought 4 handsets you should have busted their chops a but harder as just an apology

Yes but not on council tax

I have flagged this for the rest of the Site Team. Hopefully someone wuill be along soon. Are these POC's for mcol??

go on John, say it !

yes this is a ploy from barclays they do this deliberately just to confound you... you need to write back to them stating that this is in unintelligable format and you do not understand could they please supply you with the account in a different format ie bank account statements to be in running order from date you first entered and the correct balances and totals...to date the account is still in dispute as they have not satisfied your request remind them that time is still running and soon they will be in breach of your SAR hope this helps patrickq1

no other warning given a van will just turn up and will cost a minimum of £110 this is so the bailiff can charge you a van fee if the bailiff was actually going to remove goods they must give you the time and date of removal there is case law to support this p5 Forcing re-entry The law upon the rights of bailiffs to force re-entry to premises in order to remove goods previously seized has recently been clarified. In Khazanchi v Faircharm Investments; McLeod v Butterwick [1998] 2 All ER 901 the Court of Appeal held that bailiffs may only force re-entry where they are being deliberately excluded from premises. It wil

When I dealt with these clowns, I got the directors database info from either 192.com or equifax and bombarded each director with letters to thier home address. The letters from thier company stopped. Give it a try, its very satisfying, lol

Do you have receipts? I have to say I have not known anyone to claim charges back so long after it was all dealt with - but I am hardly well versed in the subject. I think if you have receipts and you can show an element of VAT that is a good start, as Bailiffs are not allowed to charge VAT as I understand it. You say that you didn't pay it promptly - I wouldn't give that too much weight - it is down to them to justify their charges. Cheers, Blurred

I would tell the court immediately. Courts don't like surprises and react badly to them.

If you have not made a payment, nor acknowledged the debt for six years then the debt is statute barred, this isn't something they can negotiate their way out of, once a debt becomes Statute Barred, it remains Statute Barred, even if you make a payment after the debt has become SB. It would be down to them to prove that the debt is not SB and if they state that a payment was made against the account (not an attempted payment, whatever that may be) they have to prove that it was you who made the payment. Morgans are Cabots in house team of "Legal Experts" ie they are the ones that can read a bit. They do not write the laws, they do

Diddly I've PM'd you

Full SAR compliance by Egg will comprise of a one-inch-high pile of paper costing possibly £50-worth of labour, in return for £10 SAR fee. For years now Egg has offered 2 slimline alternatives in reply to SAR request: All past statements, for £5. or just a list of all penalty charges with dates and amounts, for £5. Not sure if you consented to receive the £5 option. If you opted for a full print of all monthly statements and are not getting all of them, by all means write back demanding the rest as is your right. It is now November 2009, and the 6-year statute of limitations cuts off in November 2003. Some people say it is p

Nice thread and very interesting reading. Just in case, also use swarb.co.uk - lawindex@swarb.co.uk - index Then just pick what you are looking for e.g. Negligence and you get case law

IMHO, At first sight, the CCA sent to you looks to be enforceable but I do have my doubts about its authenticity. The CCA lists Liverpool Victoria as the creditor and is then overlayed on a Hitachi Capital Consumer Finance template, and as such would make the CCA unenforceable. The Default Notice is not one that is normally issued under s87 of the Consumer Credit act 1974, but s86E of the Act which covers secured agreements......a big error by Hitachi. For reference here's s86 of CCA 1974 - Sadly for Hitachi, they need to send a Default Notice under s87 before they can terminate the agreement and pursue

Gallahad I've been trying to establish this for sometime now. No-one wants to give a definitive answer but I'm working on it and will come over with something solid soon. What we do know is the following. Over 25k and it's almost impossible to get the courts to agree that these are regulated under CCA 1974 and the section that has caused all the difficulties for the lenders is s.18 multiple agreements. It looks like precedents are now being set to neuter this provision in the Act. Constitutionally however common law cannot defeat the statute so the judges are ignoring the Act in favour of their own common law construction. Ove

HI I have looked through this and I think it would help clarifying points of the CCA. It may be relevant to the cca with LBL as well as parts of this site that are concerned with banking issues and deficient CC's. could the site team look through this and post in the relevant section. Dear actionblusox Firstly, Penaltycharges.co.uk is looking for members who have a credit cards claim for penalty/unfair charges going back beyond 5 April 2006, We are currently looking into bringing a claim against the OFT, should we go ahead with this action we will be fully represented by counsel. if your interested and have a claim