West 28th Street Limited

[Monkeypower]

Any news on the potential Dan Niedle article ?., if anybody has an update.

[MrO666]

A bit quiet as we are all observing. trust me, it's a good thing. they're panicking. So trethowens missed their deadline for me today for the SAR. escalation is afoot! It's interesting how some of us have privately shared between us all outside of the forum that some have received a full SAR response, some "oh! we're too overwhelmed (a completely bollocks response!) and we're a victim of social media mis-information, stop hurting me and I am now retreating to a safe-space' , and others, like myself, just completely ignored [i have the special delivery signed-for transaction from Royal Mail]. Apparently (allegedly!) , Elysium have mandated that their subscribers not discuss anything on forums as it may prejudice the case. hmmm! really? Must say, I was flattered for being quoted in the ContractorUK article of a claim of £140k against me and I was suicidal - errr, I never said that - look up my posts. In fact I said that I'm just sat here eating popcorn watching Trethowens embarrass themsleves publicly as this continues to drag on. Ive got it on pretty good consultation that the chance of them moving to statutory demands/claim forms in the near future are about 15% (intimidation only if they do pursue), and a further chance of 25% of winning in court. And those numbers are reducing as they fail to justify or respond to requests from us all. hang in there, but keep all your docs and analysis, in the event you need to actually engage...

stay happy and enjoy the silence!

Just to add, if (and it's a big if) they did try and issue SD's etc, remember that assuming an individual has already disputed any debt exists at ANY point in the past in writing, and can evidence this, then this would very likely be classed as vexatious litigation, which courts take a very dim view of. Remember that as each subsequent company purchases any alleged loan book, they also take on all historical claims, correspondence, artefacts and disputes that may have taken place in the past, they DO NOT get reset or ignored. If W28 or Trethowans were to claim that they didn't have that information, that would 100% be their issue and their problem, not yours. This is why it's so important to keep every communication you may have had with anybody and everybody over the years, just in case you need to evidence it.

As has previously been said, a SD cannot be used to pursue a genuinely disputed claim (assuming you can evidence the dispute), and if they do so, an individual is firmly within their rights to apply for costs to be awarded against the claimant.

It'll be interesting to see what the next move is, but one things for sure, I bet neither W28 or Trethowans were expected the likes of Dan and his team to start asking questions, and I doubt that Trethowans will be that pleased about their name ultimately publicly getting associated with historical tax avoidance.

My guess would be, is that if any report does come out formally stating that, then quite quickly Trethowans will issue a statement or response to that report distancing themselves from any of it.

As for W28......well, as they appear to be totally ignoring any correspondence from anyone, it doesn't do much for their credibility if they genuinely want to box in court does it.

[EastEatsWest]

A bit quiet as we are all observing. trust me, it's a good thing. they're panicking. So trethowens missed their deadline for me today for the SAR. escalation is afoot! It's interesting how some of us have privately shared between us all outside of the forum that some have received a full SAR response, some "oh! we're too overwhelmed (a completely bollocks response!) and we're a victim of social media mis-information, stop hurting me and I am now retreating to a safe-space' , and others, like myself, just completely ignored [i have the special delivery signed-for transaction from Royal Mail]. Apparently (allegedly!) , Elysium have mandated that their subscribers not discuss anything on forums as it may prejudice the case. hmmm! really? Must say, I was flattered for being quoted in the ContractorUK article of a claim of £140k against me and I was suicidal - errr, I never said that - look up my posts. In fact I said that I'm just sat here eating popcorn watching Trethowens embarrass themsleves publicly as this continues to drag on. Ive got it on pretty good consultation that the chance of them moving to statutory demands/claim forms in the near future are about 15% (intimidation only if they do pursue), and a further chance of 25% of winning in court. And those numbers are reducing as they fail to justify or respond to requests from us all. hang in there, but keep all your docs and analysis, in the event you need to actually engage...

stay happy and enjoy the silence!

[DanJackiels]

I’m assuming there are things happening in the background ? Elysium/ trethowans.
anyone able to share anything that wouldn’t be “classified”?
I’ve gone with the Dan N approach of getting ducks in a row/ waiting to respond to an actual demand/ letter. But nothing as of yet

[PhenDi]

Just come across this https://www.instagram.com/reels/DXEwclqijY3/

Now I definitely know who Dan Niedle is!

[Thunderpants]

Not heard a word since initial contact asking for ID just over a month ago so I’ve got my follow on email ready for Monday also my complaint to ICO prepared just in case when the time comes.

just to add if it wasn’t for this forum I’d be going off my head but massive thanks to all members and admins. Unity is strength

[Monkeypower]

Has anybody received the infomation requested in their Trethowans SAR requests, or has everybody been fobbed off ?

[RetroBoy65]

Initial Response just received.....

"Thank you for your e-mail of 17^th June 2026, I note your request and receipt of your ID.



I will now consider your request and respond to you in due course.



Regards"

[looperevil]

Because that approach doesn't generate a lot of £££

Exactly. The sums they are making are eye watering on this current instruction of work

[hudson]

Of course they are capable. But my argument has always been the approach to this should have been far simpler. Having spoken to a few people (Solicitors, Accountants) who know if this issues, they have said the approach should be to respond disputing the debt and politely telling them to bleep off.

Why didn't Elysium argue these are statute barred? They dodged my question when around this when I made this point.

The guidance from the Citizens advice bureau was they have no chance with this one if they are deemed loans as they are statute barred. Good luck to Trethowans with that one. They think they are going to change the rules, laws, regulations etc...

Because that approach doesn't generate a lot of £££.

It's like a motor mechanic making a meal of a straightforward job so that he can charge more.