Jump to content
We are now - The National Consumer Service ×


  • Tweets

    No tweets were found.

  • Posts

    • Hi Can you put post up in PDF redacted your full Tenancy Agreement we need to see it all not just those clause As for the Estate Agency stating your Rent and Deposit is paying for the Redecoration of the property is wrong as this was there and the Landlords responsibility to claim those cost back from the Previous Tenants from either their Rents or Tenancy Deposit therefore the Redecoration cost is the Landlords Problem not not yours nor your Rent or Tenancy Deposit (until end of Tenancy) I would be writing to the Estate Agency asking further to your telephone conversation with XXXXXXXXX  on XX/XX/2025 you require Clarification as it was stated by your employee that I would not receive any rent nor deposit back as compensation as the Landlord was using this to Redecorate the Property. Neither my Rent nor Deposit should be used to Redecorate this Property due to the Previous Tenants as this should have been claimed back from the previous Tenants via either there Rents or Tenancy Deposit. Further to this I collected the keys as agreed on the 5th July 2025 to move into this Property with no mention at all from your Estate Agency that due to all the Redecoration ongoing when I went to that Property on that date I was not able to move into the Property as Agreed in me Agreement. You have then move my moving in date to 11th July 2025 therefore my Rent payments should commence from 11th July 2025 and I require confirmation from PPM Estate Agency and if refuse this full clarification as to why and what Housing Legislation and clauses from my Agreement. DO NOT PHONE and ask this unless you can record the call Send it by email but also follow it up in writing and get free proof of posting from the Post Office
    • Heat pump makers are ready to raise output, but demand is still sluggish.View the full article
    • The deal is part of the Trump administration's push for more aggressive adoption of artificial intelligence in the government.View the full article
    • Apologies for my laziness.  I did say I would read through the WS and suggest changes about two months ago ... but got lost in the fun of going on holiday twice. I promise that sleeves will be rolled up in the morning!
  • 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
      • 162 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
        • Thanks
        • Like

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

 

I too have just received a letter from Stevensdrake relating to a 5 year old Oz debt for $6000 i didnt even know about. I left Oz to return to UK over 5 years ago after being made redundant, had basically 4 weeks to leave the country.

 

I know get this letter out of the blue !

 

I have not acknowledged this letter.

 

It refers to Credit Corp Services Pty Ltd and an Agreement Number

 

They have also enclosed a "Statements of Means form"

 

The letter also states should legal proceedings be issued, court costs and fees will be incurred

 

Any advice on what should i do ?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Debts in Oz become Statute Barred after six years if no payment or written acknowledgement of the debt has been made (I believe it's 5 years in NSW).

 

Unless the debt was for an amount a lot larger than what they allege you owe, it would not be cost effective for them to pursue through the UK legal system. That's assuming a UK court would allow them to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received another letter from SD, this time its a "Statutory Demand Notice", stating i need to repay the total amount owed within 18 days and that i should contact a solicitor or insolvency practitioner. What should i do? should i continue to ignore these letters?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, not wanting to hijack your post Bobster but the same thing has happened to me mate.

I left in Oct 2003, and received nothing til Jan 2010. I then received from creditcorp/stevensdrake through normal Royal Mail 2 letters demanding payment and my details (by the means of a poorly doctored word document) or they'll take you to court.

 

I would like to know if this is possible, or is it plain harrassment?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, not wanting to hijack your post Bobster but the same thing has happened to me mate.

I left in Oct 2003, and received nothing til Jan 2010. I then received from creditcorp/stevensdrake through normal Royal Mail 2 letters demanding payment and my details (by the means of a poorly doctored word document) or they'll take you to court.

 

I would like to know if this is possible, or is it plain harrassment?

 

Whatever happens this is statute barred. Perhaps you should start your own thread.

 

edit...By the way, welcome to cag:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

A Statutory Demand is a legally required preliminary to being able to petition for your bankruptcy.

You have 18 days from receipt to have it set aside, otherwise the creditor can proceeed with such a petition.

You must not ignore it.

 

You can get much more detailed help over in the 'Formal Solutions ...' forum here Formal Solutions: Bankruptcy, Administration Orders and IVAs - The Consumer Forums

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said above a Statutory Demand is the necessary precursor for a bankruptcy petition. If you are happy for a creditor to make you bankrupt then you can ignore it.

 

Otherwise you must apply to have it set aside - and you have 18 days from receipt to do this.

 

There are several grounds for having the SD set aside. Some procedural ones are improper service and being unable to contact the person named on the SD.

Others more to do with the matter of the debt include debt not owed or has been repaid, debt being statute-barred or debt being in dispute for some reason.

In your case the matter of jurisdiction is probably an issue and I think you need legal advice on this point. I don't know enough about this issue to be able to help you myself so you could, for a first step, contact the Insolvency service The Insolvency Service Website. Follow the 'Contact us' links until you find the phone numbers.

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm getting conflicting information, some people say i should ignore the last poster palomino says i must not ignore.

Palomino generally gives good advice on here but there are two schools of thought regarding SDs. 1 is Palominos and the other is based on the opinion of a solicitor. (I will try to find the link) The solicitors advise in a nutshell is that if the creditor was serious about the SD then they would have served the SD on you in person and therefore had proof of service. As it stands now they cannot prove service. Posting an SD by first class mail is acceptable if they have at least attempted personal service and can attach an affadavit to confirm this. By you acknowledging receipt of the SD then you do their job for them. 99 times out of 100 the use of an SD is a scare tactic to get you to contact their telephone threat monkeys.

 

Have you had any formal notice that this debt has been sold on to these people and been legally assigned. Was there ever a judgement against you in Australia

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still all seems complicated to me, as i previously stated when i was made redundant in Australia and only having 4 weeks to leave the country, to the best of my knowledge i cleared all my outstanding debts before i left.

Following the statement of means letter i now get this SD from SD. As i have also stated i have not acknowledged any of these letters.

I have not received any formal notice that the debt has been sold on and legally assigned, i am also unaware of any judgement against me in Australia.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...