Reply to: West 28th Street Limited

[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]

Does anyone also have a good template for a dispute letter ? I have used Claude but perhaps having a response that is overly detailed is not the best

How about sometyhing like this?

Subject: FORMAL DISPUTE – Alleged Debt – Ref: [Insert Their Reference Number]

Dear Sirs,

I am writing in response to your recent correspondence regarding an alleged debt assigned to your client, West 28th Street Limited, concerning a historical contractor arrangement linked to [list companies such as IQ Consultants and Umbrella Requirements Limited].
I fully dispute this alleged debt in its entirety on the following grounds:

1. No Sum is Due Under the Enforceable Agreements: The contract explicitly states that “each loan shall be repayable on or before the thirtieth anniversary of its being made.” As this 30-year term will not elapse until 2043, no sums are currently due, payable, or enforceable. Early prepayment remains entirely at my discretion.

1. Failure to Provide the 2013 Agreement: I do not possess this agreement. I require you to provide strict proof of a complete, un-redacted, signed copy of the original contract you are attempting to rely upon.

1. Isle of Man Regulatory Deficiencies: The alleged 2013 arrangement involved entities operating out of the Isle of Man, explicitly including Black Lake LTD (formerly IQ Consultants LTD, Co. No. 008804V) and ECS International Trustees (Isle of Man) Limited (Co. No. 020135C). If these agreements are governed by Manx law, I require strict proof that these original entities and any subsequent assignees held the mandatory registration under the Isle of Man Moneylenders Act 1991 at the time the funds were advanced or assigned. Absent this registration, the agreements are fundamentally void and unenforceable under Manx law.

1. Limitation Act 1980 / Time-Barring: Without prejudice to the above points, given that this alleged arrangement dates back [state length of time], any claim that a cause of action arose historically is entirely statute-barred under the UK Limitation Act 1980 (or the Isle of Man Limitation Act 1984). The strict 6-year statutory limit for enforcement via the courts has long since expired.

1. HMRC Settlement: This historical arrangement was part of a registered disguised remuneration tax scheme. His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has officially reclassified these payments as taxable employment income, not commercial loans. I have already fully settled all income tax and National Insurance liabilities regarding these specific funds directly with HMRC, and I hold a formal settlement agreement.

1. Strict Proof of Chain of Assignment: I require your client to provide strict, un-redacted documentary proof of the complete chain of assignment showing exactly how alleged rights legally passed from the prior lender ECS International Trustees (Isle of Man) Limited, through the original lender [state lenders such as Black Lake LTD / IQ Consultants], to Felicitas Solutions, and ultimately to West 28th Street Limited. This must include written proof that each entity held the valid legal power under the trust deeds to make such assignments.
2. Denial of Alleged Interest: I fully dispute and deny any liability for interest sums claimed in your correspondence. No contractual mechanism or statutory basis exists to permit your client to apply or recover interest on these non-commercial, reclassified funds.

Formal Statutory Request:
Please treat this letter as a formal Subject Access Request (SAR) under the UK GDPR. I require you to provide a complete copy of all personal data, internal notes, phone logs, and financial ledger histories held on your systems regarding my name. Please note that under Civil Procedure Rules and Pre-Action Protocols, you are expected to place all automated collection actions or legal threats on hold while you process this statutory document request.

Please confirm in writing that this matter has been put on hold while this dispute is formally reviewed, and that all automated collection activity against me has ceased.
Yours faithfully,

[Your Name]
[Your Current Address]

[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.