West 28th Street Limited

[MrO666]

It very much is sarcasm.......

 

[snowfall]

This one is odd. It's 5 stars feel like sarcasm.

That's unfortunate, don't 5 star reviews appear on their home page?

Nothing to do with me and I definitely don't endorse that.

Edit: Also not for brigading even though I'm affected

 

[eek]

That's unfortunate, don't 5 star reviews appear on their home page?

Nothing to do with me and I definitely don't endorse that.

Edit: Also not for brigading even though I'm affected

Yep - and it’s going to be there all weekend - I also expect it’s got to be very hard to remove after all it’s a high rating just utterly damning and poisonous if you read it

 

[corsair]

Maybe a dumb question... but who will be reveiwing and organising all the disputing correspondance back to Trethowan? Trethowan or will they hand over to Ethica? Are Trethowans just providing counsel and a letter head?

I know for sure that responses are sent on to Ethica. Because they have written to me directly quoting concerns for my mental health that was in a letter I wrote back to Trethowans. Threathowans never bothered writing to me with concern or advice about the Samaritans.

 

[chasedbyloansharks]

Yep - and it’s going to be there all weekend - I also expect it’s got to be very hard to remove after all it’s a high rating just utterly damning and poisonous if you read it

Stroke of genius leaving a 5 star review 🤣

 

[WJK]

Trust pilot review sent naming all companies involved!

 

[WJK]

Trust pilot review sent naming all companies involved

 

[JD1905]

My view is that if this ever ended up in court, one of the first things a judge is likely to look at is how it got there in the first place.

If West 28 and/or Trethowans can show they contacted you about the alleged debt, followed the Pre-Action Protocol and didn't get a response, then it's easy to see why they would have decided to issue a claim.

On the other hand, if you can show that you disputed the debt every step of the way, repeatedly asked for proof that you were liable and evidence that West 28th Street had the right to collect it, and those requests weren't properly answered, that puts you in a much stronger position. The same goes for any Subject Access Requests that weren't complied with, or any other failures to engage with the issues you raised.

At the end of the day, it's a bit like a game of chess. You're trying to put yourself in the best possible position by showing that you've acted reasonably throughout and made genuine attempts to resolve matters without court action.

That's really the whole point of the Pre-Action Protocol: to give both sides the opportunity to exchange information and try to avoid court if possible.

Ultimately, though, everyone has to decide for themselves how they want to deal with the situation.

I disagree. Whilst I cannot say what any given judge is likely to do - a judgement will be made on fact, not process. The question will be "Does the defendant owe this money" the answer is either Yes, or No. What has happened before the fact has no bearing on the answer to that question.

The claimant will be put to strict proof to provide the court with evidence that I owe them the money. If they are able to do that, then fair game and we're all stuffed - but ultimately, it will be their job to try and do that - that will give you the answer to the above.

This will be their case - they can do the work. I still see no benefit of engaging at all with them.

 

[seriouslyman]

Very long time reader of this forum and have to say it's a place of inspiration and togetherness. Whilst many will have different circumstances we're all touched by this in some way and the comments / advice are invaluable - thanks to all.

I'm affected and been in touch with the FCA back and forth. This is great news and welcome support. I agree with others on the fact this should not be ignored and the letters of claim need to be replied back to simply disputing. It's my understanding that not disputing will do more harm than good and you wouldn't want to open yourself up to the 'well, you didn't dispute it' regardless of the fact you may have replied to other letters from one of the 3 Stooges.

This case has more holes in it than swiss cheese. They've been playing musical chairs and the hokey cokey over the past 10 years in passing round deeds, buying loan books, trying, failing, trying again, in CCA, out of CCA, default, not default, pay voluntarily, not enforceable.... blah blah.... Any court would see this as amateur hour at best.

But - god loves a trier.... The FCA intervention is great. However, it pauses the work yet doesn't resolve the case. I'm not sure what I would hate more, someone from HMRC knocking on my door or a Telegraph journalist (BTW, Mike Warburton who wrote the article has picked up from the comments that Trethowans are involved and says he needs to give them the right of reply - Knock Knock Mr Trethowan....). Either way, I strongly suspect all the 3 Stooges will be going to bed in a very different mood tonight - apart from Ethica who will be pulling an all nighter as they have lots of homework to be getting on with.

From reading about validation orders - these are anything but straight forward and made more complicated as it's not a one size fits all scenario. There are pre and post 1 April 2014 forms to complete pending when arrangements were taken out. The forms are on the FCA site and as much as I love a form filling afternoon on a weekend I would not like to do this one. It's in 2 stages and whilst stage 1 is full of questions they will struggle to answer (and there's a fee), stage 2 involves them contacting all those impacted to assess 'harm' with a questionnaire which the FCA have to agree to before its sent out. (and there are then what they term as 'project fees' to pay - not sure but sounds more than a few quid). So, in relation to stage 2 - do they honestly think they can send out 000's of questionnaires and no-one is going to say that no harm has come to them... we have / are all experiencing harm from this from the odd sleepless night to the worse we could imagine - so good luck with that application.

Whilst we shouldn't be complacent, the past week has been a very good week!

 

[ScotchBonnet]

I hope Dan Neidle names Trethowan in his article.