Have come to this one fairly late and it seems that you are getting good advice here. FWIW - Agree with R&J - try to stick this out. If the new manager is being dictatorial, a CD case will be doubly hard to win so best to hold fast and see what happens. As far as I can see you have no case to answer as regards the use of the facilities for private jobs. Custom and Practice dictates that such use was fully permitted by the employer over a lengthy period of time and you had no knowledge of a change in this policy. There are plenty of witnesses to that and it is a matter of record that you were absent when any change was notified.

hfc are the pits when it comes to ppi and customer service they will pull any stunt to delay the issue. do you have the agreements? with those you will be home free and they will cough the FOS are getting VERY tired of HFC and their tactics see my threads for more get that SAR off and include the line and all agreements i have held with you org. the questionaire is part of the FOS process but HFC like everything they do, has produced one to have the maximum frustration rating with customers in the hope they will give up. dx

Debt avoidance ? Not a good idea, and not what this website is about. Nobody is saying 'pay up', there is help to sort it all out, if that's still possible at this late stage. Have a read around, it may be useful - but only if you are prepared to help yourself.

Nope, if there are no T&C's along with the document they sent, it hardly constututes an "agreement". I think they are anticipating your argument.

Have you had a read of my thread joe? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/244988-fluffystuffs-oh-hfc-7.html There's quite a bit there that should help you. x

You should submit a Witness Statement 7 days before the hearing. The WS should clearly set out your reasons for the DJ NOT to enter SJ against you. The other side should have made their case for SJ - it is your job to rubbish that. You can also expand a bit on that and give some of the reasons why you think you will actually win the case in the end. At the hearing the other side should not try and produce any new evidence or statements or anything like that - if they do then object if you feel you are on the back foot and ask for an adjournment with costs against them for bending the rules. Their WS should be with you 3

received this number form an automated response 3342978

Ony insofar as you might have joint debts or joint assets.

Hi THis may be of some use had to dig it out THE DETERMINATION The Determination (which is signed by the Director of Fair Trading) is made under section 74(3) of the Act. I set it out in full: "1. Under the powers conferred upon me by Sections 74(3) and (3A) and 133 of the Consumer Credit 1974, I, the Director General, being satisfied that it would not be against the public interest to do so, hereby revoke with effect from 1st February 1990 the Determination made by me in respect of Section 74(1)(b) and dated 3 November 1983 and now determine that with effect from 1st February 1990 Section 74(1)(b) shall apply to every debtor-credit

I have a similar thing with Capone, its been passed to Fred for collection who I refuse to contact. I'm actually paying Capone back at a reasonable rate, they say they are unable to accept my payment proposal as I need to contact Fred. I actually wrote back to them asking if I did this would they then accept the sum I proposed. I have managed to get all the £12 fees returned with account interest on this account too. Took about 3 letters but they caved in in the end. The major sticking point I have is if I have a pay plan with Fred will all the money I pay go to the debt. To date they refuse to answer this question, so I keep payin

they are entitled (assuming of course that you have not disputed the validity of the agreement itself) to the amount of genuine arrears that were due at the time the agreement was unlawfully terminated the DN itself- nor the subsequent termination letter or demand for payment in full of sums not yet due- are the point of termination- since as this was an UNLAWFUL attempt to terminate- it is of no effect unless you- the performing party elect to accept their unlawful actions as termination thus (imo) the agreement effectively "terminates" when you write and tell them that you have accepted their unlawful repudiation and are now re

If you Google the case I showed above, you should get various summaries to read through as well as the entire ruling. In essence, a business man claimed his reputation was damaged by the bank's action of bouncing a cheque when they should not have done. He was compensated. The reality is that you are unlikely to take such action but it may just get the bank and their cronies to back off and take note of what you're saying. Send the letter to BC and a copy to Lowells.

Not having a picture from the camera is not a defence per se. The standard reply seems to be that the picture is merely to record the offending vehicle and not for driver identification. Since this is a summary case, advanced disclosure is not required either, so any documentary evidence the police (or safety camera partnership) may have would be to aid the prosecution case and nothing else. However, should the police not provide a picture (or as you say, provide one showing the back of the car), one would be left with the option of just providing the details of possible drivers. It would then be up to the police to make the next

For the benefit of Dragon Keeper: When a someone is caught speeding (by a speed camera for instance), the registered keeper of the vehicle in question is sent a form asking them to identify the driver at the time of the offence. (a section 172 request.) There are three options - 1) They were the driver, 2) They were not the driver, in which case, they must state who was driving and 3) they were not the registered keeper of the vehicle at the time of the offence. In scenario 2, the person to whom the driver identification request is sent to is expected state who was driving. In the case of a hire car, the company would pass on

Hmn good to see that you agree on something Raymond;) I have lots of confidence in VF sorting this one.....which is more than can be said for our Orange response. I trust you will be in agreement with my voiced concerns at their interventions upto now ?

unbelievable...do not pay them another penny...cancel any debits going out to this dmp and tell them to sling their hook..helping??? all they are doing is adding to your debts

Hi and welcome Your first step is to send a seperate CCA Request as below for each account. Send to the latest DCA who are chasing, then sit back and wait. This will also deal with harrassment over the phone etc. Send them a CCA request to see if they are entitled to collect this debt & if it's enforcable. If they fail to provide it within 12+2 days or the CCA is unenforcable you can legally withold any payment until they do. Send it recorded delivery enclosing a £1 postal order. When you get a reply, scan it & remove any identifying details and post it back here where we can have a look at it. We'll advise you from ther

Welcome to the forum and congratulations on posting! It is the first step in getting your life back. Others will be here with more specific advice. I can only advise on my own experience and what I have picked up on here. My instinct would be to go down the route of CCA'ing the DCA's dealing with the alleged debts. That way at least you will know which ones are enforceable and which arent. Monx

Hi YAAV, it's quite normal for links to be vetted by the Site Team. The main reason is to protect us Caggers as some links may seem innocent enough but then lead the user down the route of paying for advice etc when it is our aim to provide this free. I think there has been problems in the past with spam sites and people touting for business on the site which just muddies the water for everyone. So this is probably the best system for keeping the site clean and user friendly. Links which are clearly and obviously free - charitities, personal [facebook etc] seem to post ok. That said, I guess the best thing would be drop one of the regular S

Amend as required: Dear Sirs CCA Request dated ===== Further to my request of the above date which was received by yourselves on the ====== please note that this request was very clearly headed I do not admit any debt to your company or representatives. Further it very clearly stated that the £1 Postal Order sent with the above mentioned request was to be the statutory fee as required for the provision of the information requested. Your letter of ====== clearly states that you have incorrectly taken this payment as a part payment against the disputed Agreement, which is not allowed and I therefore require that you rem

Good luck. Many people (me including) are overjoyed to get their first property only to be disapointed when every increasing service charge bills start dropping through the door with little explanation. I went through a few years of high charges, extra admin fees, etc. and it has only been recently that I began to brush up on the various laws and statutes, the main ones are The Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 and The Commonhold & Leasehold Reform Act 2002, which bought in some new provisions and added changed to the L & T Act 1985. In recent years there have been some important changes to the law giving more power to Ten

Refurbs really are not an issue for the first 8-12 months after launch. It will often NOT have the charger and accessories, and this is why it isn't in retail packaging. There's no foolproof way of telling as even refurbs have the latest firmware and new shells. But do what you need to do BEFORE you leave the store and compare, that way you can get them on your side if they experience the same issues.