chewits - the debtquake monster is coming

kissjenn

Cheers F_F. This isn't a case of wriggling out of a contract, they are blatantly penalising people and reinterpreting their own contract however it suits. Not on, danders up ... lets see what OFT says.

mooomin

Ooh I like your ticker - it's as though the lightening will strike any non-paying tenants :rotfl:

kissjenn

One little darling (the one Granny whacked) is moving out on Sunday with his TWO 50" TVs and owing me £1900. And can I do anything....?

Yes...I'm going to peg him out on the lawn, wrap his w*lly in bacofoil and pray for lightening....



Fry arrears boy!!!

mooomin

kissjenn wrote: »

I'm going to peg him out on the lawn, wrap his w*lly in bacofoil and pray for lightening....



Fry arrears boy!!!

Dear kissjen,

You win the Quote of the Day award.

Love n hugs,

flying_fresian

EssexHebridean

LOL - must say I undesrtand your sentiments entirely! utterly ridiculous that you can't do anything about it - why on earth the little scroat should think that he can just live off you for nothing lord knows. :mad:

kissjenn

Just praying he actually goes on Sunday (he hadn't packed on Tuesday!). I have virtually no power to get him out...and unfortunately I'm as physically indimidating as a womble.




However the Benefit Fraud team wanted his forwarding details so I had a wee word today to say actually he's still there. They're popping round for to see him and have a chat tomorrow.

He's pobably logged onto the "how to screw your landlord" thread elsewhere on here!

Raini

Hope he does leave - some people are unbelievable!

Hope you didn't think I was implying you were trying to dodge the gym stuff ... just wanted to say that if I was able to argue my way out of my mistake I think it's totally unfair that you can't just cancel on very reasonable grounds! x

kissjenn

Hi Raini, not at all. Never even crossed my mind. All power to your elbow.

They've written some very silly things to me in which they admit openly that they will charge medical cases more than non. Its blatant discrimination and I don't think they should get away with it.


I phoned OFT for advice of who I should speak to as this is a specific case and they don't do those but the guy said we'll take take it here because doesn't sound fair or correct. Sent all the paperwork off this evening.


I honestly thought Bannatyne would play the "I didn't know and we'll fix it" card which gives him some positive PR but no he's defending the indefensible which to my little mind is a PR nightmare to save a couple of quid. The cost / benefit is all wrong. If he wins with OFT he saves. quite literally, a few quid but it will cost him professional time. If he loses he faces potentially a reputational backlash if a militant disabled group or charity pick up on this. Why would any supposedly savvy businessman do that?

mooomin

kissjenn wrote: »

If he loses he faces potentially a reputational backlash if a militant disabled group or charity pick up on this. Why would any supposedly savvy businessman do that?

Have you considered contacting such a charity?

Would this fall under the DDA?

kissjenn

I'm not sure about the DDA angle the journalist was neant to be checking it out. I may call the RNIB tomorrow and get their take. I just cannot see how it is legal to charge different people different amounts to obtain an identical outcome and it's always the ill or disable who will pay more.

Sorry, repeating myself but I keep thinking I must be missing something blindingly obvious. Bannatyne's kept saying but as a gesture of goodwill we'll reduce his leaving penalty to match yours...they just didn't get it.

Double sorry, rant over. Don't get mad, get even time.

Wonder if there's room in the garden for both Big Dunc and Arrears-Boy, kn0bs wrapped in bacofoil and lightning brewing?