Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Because many didn't. In my case, I was sent a pack to sign in the post well after I had been onboarded about this so called loan agreement. They asked for me to sign it. I refused to sign it and never sent it back to them.
Because west 28th are using Trethowans as a front to intimidate us. Trethowans aren't even reading the emails we are sending them. They are being auto forwarded to West 28th.
Is this even allowed? Is this not a mistake representation?
The scheme that I was on was UK based, not IoM. As such, they were never a authorised lender according to the FCA. The only time IoM entered my chain was when Felicitas got involved.
I'm going to go as far as saying Trethowans are done on this matter. They haven't a chance in hell with any of this...even with those who have "made a payment".
Shows you how much the likes of Elysium and now Greenwoods are milking from this.
Also, the FCA link to this HMRC article:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/loan-schemes-and-the-loan-charge-an-overview/repaying-a-disguised-remuneration-loan-to-a-third-party
whether the loan agreement is unenforceable because the original lender, or any third party the lender has...
She doesn't work there any more and the when I spoke to them a few months ago, they said they didn't have much of a clue on this subject as Karen worked on it.
If you are going to instruct a solicitor, set aside at least £5k for the initial back and forth. If it goes to court, then I guess it will be upwards of an additional £10k?
I would definitely try your home insurance first if you have legal cover. They will do an initial analysis based on your...
There is 3 buckets of people:
1. Have recieved nothing in the latest round
2. Have received something via post but not recorded delivery
3. Have recieved something via recorded delivery
The thinking is most likely;
1. They have very almost nothing to build a case
2. Have something but not...
What they have written is beyond funny. Agree with the above - that is pretty much a slam dunk. This is clearly fraud as nobody accessed this portal they speak of as it didn't exist. There will be date stamps of when whatever website the portal is accessed via was created.