Reply to: West 28th Street Limited

[Locumconractor]

I also received one of these today, dated the 24th April and arrived today (25th April). It feels like this letter is positioning to start taking action against me.

Searching google I saw that there was some action taken by Elysium Law back in August 2024 against 28th West West 28th Street Demands: Why Contractors Should Wait - Elysium Law I have sent them an email asking to join their group action - it might be too late to join that specific one, but it seems that the scheming felicitas have sold this allged loan to another company and they are also chancing their arm on trying to recover something that is not legally owed. I made such a mistake believing the phony QC approved ways to reduce the tax burden. I settled with HMRC, now these sharks are trying to get more money from me.

It is depressing...

Settling with HMRC may just be your salvation

[shampoo]

I spoke to someone who knows the idiot who is running. West 28. He said it's the solicitors who are pushing this. They believe they have a case. So the no win no fee theory probably stacks up.

They have a loan book of close to a billion - well it's names on a spreadsheet with no evidence they are loans. Good luck idiots (and yes they are reading this).

I don’t believe you!

[Locumconractor]

Just as FYI contacting FCA resulted in advice to contact:

- IOM regulator 01624689300
- CSA trade body about unregulated alleged "debt" 0191 217 0775
- contact Money Helper

Case logged about West 28th non-FCA approved, chasing an alleged "consumer credit loan" under CCA 1974 via Trethowans.

The more the merrier I guess.

***ADDITIONAL INFO****

FCA confirmed Ethica is not debt collection registered - thoughts?

They have no case then, nor do West 28th Street!

[chasedbyloansharks]

Bloody hell, they must have done feck all due diligence if they think they’ve got a case. The lazy buggers must have just seen the £££££££’s sum on the spreadsheet and thought ‘wahayy!!’.

Hahahahaha! Clowns.
First genuine laugh I’ve had about this crap all week.

[chasedbyloansharks]

You highlight the fact they are happy to send you letters but create hoops when asked to provide the information that formed that basis of the letter but jump through the hoops they are creating to avoid doing work..

And the sole purpose of them asking for ID is to put every legal barrier they can find to avoid doing work that is going to cost them actual time and money to do.

Now I would say also complain to the SRA but I've just been shown by someone else that the SRA are currently under investigation for not being fit for purpose with requirements to improve so I would suggest waiting until new management is in place before complaining the them.

You can complain to the FCA about Ethica Resolve Limited stating that the loan is subject the CCA act (assuming the letter implies something to that effect).

Thanks for the steer, this is where my response is leaning too.
I’d like a record of everything they have on me now so they can’t add to it down the line but also don’t want to give them anything they can use.

It’s patently obvious they are just putting up obstacles, but to be honest I didn’t even expect a response.

FCA is a good shout, that will be the next step and ICO once the clock starts ticking.

[Diagnose b4 u prescribe]

I’ve just realised that I put this in the wrong thread

Done

[cojak]

I spoke to someone who knows the idiot who is running. West 28. He said it's the solicitors who are pushing this. They believe they have a case. So the no win no fee theory probably stacks up.

They have a loan book of close to a billion - well it's names on a spreadsheet with no evidence they are loans. Good luck idiots (and yes they are reading this).

Bloody hell, they must have done feck all due diligence if they think they’ve got a case. The lazy buggers must have just seen the £££££££’s sum on the spreadsheet and thought ‘wahayy!!’.

[looperevil]

I wonder if Trethowans are doing this on a no-win, no-fee basis? [joke]

Seriously though, this must be costing W28 a fortune. Trethowans may not be the most prestigious law firm out there but supposedly they're in the top 150, and they definitely won't come cheap.

Also, what's the deal with this new lot Ethica? Are W28 paying them too, or are they on a % of anything recovered?

W28 are essentially a one-man-band (Ken), right? Can't help thinking this is a case of throwing good money (to Trethowans) after bad (buying the stupid loans in the first place).

I spoke to someone who knows the idiot who is running. West 28. He said it's the solicitors who are pushing this. They believe they have a case. So the no win no fee theory probably stacks up.

They have a loan book of close to a billion - well it's names on a spreadsheet with no evidence they are loans. Good luck idiots (and yes they are reading this).

[woody1]

I wonder if Trethowans are doing this on a no-win, no-fee basis? [joke]

Seriously though, this must be costing W28 a fortune. Trethowans may not be the most prestigious law firm out there but supposedly they're in the top 150, and they definitely won't come cheap.

Also, what's the deal with this new lot Ethica? Are W28 paying them too, or are they on a % of anything recovered?

W28 are essentially a one-man-band (Ken), right? Can't help thinking this is a case of throwing good money (to Trethowans) after bad (buying the stupid loans in the first place).

[eek]

See upthread, I had a reply asking for photo id to verify my identity. I want to see everything they have on me so will give some thought as to how to proceed.

You highlight the fact they are happy to send you letters but create hoops when asked to provide the information that formed that basis of the letter but jump through the hoops they are creating to avoid doing work..

And the sole purpose of them asking for ID is to put every legal barrier they can find to avoid doing work that is going to cost them actual time and money to do.

Now I would say also complain to the SRA but I've just been shown by someone else that the SRA are currently under investigation for not being fit for purpose with requirements to improve so I would suggest waiting until new management is in place before complaining the them.

You can complain to the FCA about Ethica Resolve Limited stating that the loan is subject the CCA act (assuming the letter implies something to that effect).

[cojak]

Ethica Resolve Limited is registered with the FCA

FCA = Financial Conduct Authority. This page will explain your rights and will take you to the complaints page . https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/you...ncial-services

Here is the complaints page: https://www.fca.org.uk/consumers/how-complain

The regular reminder.

[MrO666]

Totally different tack here, but I wonder what the FCA would think about an FCA Registered Company (Ethica) trying to enforce repayment of an alleged loan that is being falsely claimed to be under CCA Regulations, and where the alleged loan owner refusing to provide any evidence to substantiate that position, and also where Dan Niedle is actively investigating.

The FCA know very well who Dan is too.

Can't imagine they would be overly impressed.

[PJSMITH1980]

Is everyone sending a separate Sar and letter of dispute at same time or sar first and dispute a few days later ?

[chasedbyloansharks]

Did you get a reply from either and have you received the latest demand ?

See upthread, I had a reply asking for photo id to verify my identity. I want to see everything they have on me so will give some thought as to how to proceed.

[shampoo]

In which case

1) why was Mr Sacco so desperate to have a UK company with the same name as the IoM company that there are 2 English companies with the same name as the IoM company.
2) how does a debt move from IoM jurisdiction to another one - remembering that back in 2020 they tried to use Statutory Demands in a failed attempt to change jurisdiction to the UK...
And to be really clear
3) How can a debt move from being a loan from a Employee Benefit trust in the IoM to a consumer loan subject to UK Consumer Credit laws?

The alleged debt doesn’t move … but if these are now regulated agreements they must be in prescribed form, contain the prescribed terms and be signed by the debtor.

section 77A and section 61 go hand in hand.