Things about to get very serious and much more real? / Felicitas Letters

[balton9]

Stop!

I posted the below on the Best Employment Thread (#43) a few weeks ago but it could equally apply here. Remember this is a public forum and you shouldn't give away any freebies to whoever is watching your posts or whoever might be potentially diverting the conversation to fish for info:

Eek is correct, people should seek proper legal advice & it's also worth reminding people NOT to post what they think are defence arguments on this or any other public forum. Scheme providers & others read these forums & there's no point giving them time to prepare a counter-argument. Don't give them any freebies! Loose lips sink ships.

Remember: Zip it! Got it? Good!

[eek]

If this does all end up in court - surely the original trust company will also be brought into court and asked why did you sell this so-called debt to Felicitas or did that never happen and to that point HOW DID YOU RAISE THESE FUNDS SO THAT YOU COULD OFFER THESE SO-CALLED LOANS.

Mmmmm

Sadly, possibly, completely irrelevant.

The only thing a court may care about is the last transaction between you and the whatever entity "lent" you the money.

Don't assume that a court will care about anything beyond that - you may be lucky but I wouldn't gamble anything on it.

[happychap]

Where did the money come from !

Agree, I was referring to the fact that there is no statutory requirements for the users to provide list of financial transaction as they are not obliged to keep records after 6 years.

That puts onus on Felicitas to provide evidence, rather than user incriminating themselves.

Best case Felicitas has no access to the transaction list and will not get it now as they have no authority over the old banking accounts, and even failing that if they did produce a list, they need to still prove the payments were loans. As opposed to it could be anything, salary, payment for services, payment for invoice and etc.

If this does all end up in court - surely the original trust company will also be brought into court and asked why did you sell this so-called debt to Felicitas or did that never happen and to that point HOW DID YOU RAISE THESE FUNDS SO THAT YOU COULD OFFER THESE SO-CALLED LOANS.

Mmmmm - just on that point did you pay tax on that money to HMRC.....

[luxCon]

But the issue there is that statutory period limits actually kick off from when repayment was first requested not when the money was received (and that is probably February 2020 rather than 2011 as people on here may be hoping).

As such not having the bank statements may be a problem as it could be their word against yours and they could have the bank statements showing £x was paid into your account over the period.

As I've being saying now for a very long time:-

1) Tell Felicitas that you don't believe you owe them money.
2) Get any and all paperwork you have ready in case you need it

Agree, I was referring to the fact that there is no statutory requirements for the users to provide list of financial transaction as they are not obliged to keep records after 6 years.

That puts onus on Felicitas to provide evidence, rather than user incriminating themselves.

Best case Felicitas has no access to the transaction list and will not get it now as they have no authority over the old banking accounts, and even failing that if they did produce a list, they need to still prove the payments were loans. As opposed to it could be anything, salary, payment for services, payment for invoice and etc.

[eek]

Is there not a 6 year statutory period after which you are not obliged to keep financial records such as bank statements?

In my recent personal experience unrelated to this subject, with Barclays they told me they can only provide backdated list of transaction for up to 6 years.


Therefore users should not feel any legal obligations to provide list of financial transactions.

But the issue there is that statutory period limits actually kick off from when repayment was first requested not when the money was received (and that is probably February 2020 rather than 2011 as people on here may be hoping).

As such not having the bank statements may be a problem as it could be their word against yours and they could have the bank statements showing £x was paid into your account over the period.

As I've being saying now for a very long time:-

1) Tell Felicitas that you don't believe you owe them money.
2) Get any and all paperwork you have ready in case you need it

[luxCon]

The Ombudsman is correct here - receiving money could be enough for it to be a loan...

Whether Felicitas can prove is enough to the satisfaction of a court and demonstrate that the loan is now owned by Felicitas is Felicitas's problem - so they are doing everything they can to avoid having to do so.

But as you note and as I've continually pointed out, you do need to tell Felicitas that you don't think you owe them any money.

Is there not a 6 year statutory period after which you are not obliged to keep financial records such as bank statements?

In my recent personal experience unrelated to this subject, with Barclays they told me they can only provide backdated list of transaction for up to 6 years.


Therefore users should not feel any legal obligations to provide list of financial transactions.

[eek]

As soon as Felicitas contacted me way back when (February 2020), I have challenged them to provide 'evidence' that I owed them money and that the loans were in my name and I had signed up to them. After many months of to-ing and fro-ing they sent me 'evidence' which was a PDF of a 'loan agreement' with my name and address on it and a 'time stamp', calling out this was the time I approved the 'loan'. I challenged them that this was not 'evidence' as anyone can produce a PDF with a timestamp put on it. I* asked specifically for evidence of me, or anyone linked to me, signing a loan agreement. They continually advised that the PDF was evidence. I therefore contacted the IoM Ombudsman in June 2020 to raise a formal complaint against Felicitas harassing me for monies I do not owe. The Ombudsman asked me to provide bank statements from the specific time (I refused) and also asked me to contact my bank so they could provide bank statements (I again refused - I have changed bank since 2012). It appears as though the only 'evidence' Felicitas have are PDFs of 'loan agreements' with a random timestamp on them.

The Ombudsman has said they will go back to Felicitas to see what evidence they have (which is none iun my opinion). My complaint is still ongoing with the Ombudsman. I will keep you all informed as to how it goes. PLEASE NOTE: I engaged with Felicitas straight away and denied owing them money consistently and frequently.

The Ombudsman is correct here - receiving money could be enough for it to be a loan...

Whether Felicitas can prove is enough to the satisfaction of a court and demonstrate that the loan is now owned by Felicitas is Felicitas's problem - so they are doing everything they can to avoid having to do so.

But as you note and as I've continually pointed out, you do need to tell Felicitas that you don't think you owe them any money.

[Brendan Clarke]

Felicitas and stuff

As soon as Felicitas contacted me way back when (February 2020), I have challenged them to provide 'evidence' that I owed them money and that the loans were in my name and I had signed up to them. After many months of to-ing and fro-ing they sent me 'evidence' which was a PDF of a 'loan agreement' with my name and address on it and a 'time stamp', calling out this was the time I approved the 'loan'. I challenged them that this was not 'evidence' as anyone can produce a PDF with a timestamp put on it. I* asked specifically for evidence of me, or anyone linked to me, signing a loan agreement. They continually advised that the PDF was evidence. I therefore contacted the IoM Ombudsman in June 2020 to raise a formal complaint against Felicitas harassing me for monies I do not owe. The Ombudsman asked me to provide bank statements from the specific time (I refused) and also asked me to contact my bank so they could provide bank statements (I again refused - I have changed bank since 2012). It appears as though the only 'evidence' Felicitas have are PDFs of 'loan agreements' with a random timestamp on them.

The Ombudsman has said they will go back to Felicitas to see what evidence they have (which is none iun my opinion). My complaint is still ongoing with the Ombudsman. I will keep you all informed as to how it goes. PLEASE NOTE: I engaged with Felicitas straight away and denied owing them money consistently and frequently.

[neveragain]

If only you had checked CUK first...

This IQ stuff was done around 9 years ago. Didn't contract for too long before I stopped. First and last contract.
Didn't expect all this 9 years later.

Also, didn't know CUK existed then.

[BrilloPad]

I do, was my first and only time, now I have to suffer and stress coz of it.

If only you had checked CUK first...