Fashion World

Tozer

But that is utter rubbish.

If it was not a genuine pre-estimate of the loss likely to be suffered, then it is a penalty. It has not cost the company 5 times the amount of the item to recover. The principal has been paid and they are purely collecting costs whcih they are not entitled to do.

Its got nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of it. The OP asked for a view on the "legal rights". What you are saying is a moralistic view which have no place here.

They could have simply issued a summons for £30 if they were so dead set on collecting the debt.

The debt is not due. Pure and simple.

Tozer

bottomsup wrote: »

I would say you have no rights as there is something in the T&C about a late payment fee.

Unfortunately, T's and C's don't override established principles of English law.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

Tozer wrote: »

But that is utter rubbish.

If it was not a genuine pre-estimate of the loss likely to be suffered, then it is a penalty. It has not cost the company 5 times the amount of the item to recover. The principal has been paid and they are purely collecting costs whcih they are not entitled to do.

Its got nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of it. The OP asked for a view on the "legal rights". What you are saying is a moralistic view which have no place here.

They could have simply issued a summons for £30 if they were so dead set on collecting the debt.

The debt is not due. Pure and simple.

The cost of a few letters, phone calls and debt recovery systems for the organisation. easily justify the charges imo of course and the OFT seemed to think £12 a month for this was reasonable

Tozer

LinasPilibaitisisbatman wrote: »

The cost of a few letters, phone calls and debt recovery systems for the organisation. easily justify the charges imo of course and the OFT seemed to think £12 a month for this was reasonable

OP - ask them to prove their losses. Simple.

daveboy

The item was 'purchased' if you can call it that, last October.

It is now very nearly June.

Think yourself lucky it's £80.

The OP has brought all this on themselves.

It is clear Tozer...that you support people who are not prepared to accept they're to blame. Well done you. :rolleyes:

This is no different to a credit card for me and the charges are totally justified.

Tozer

daveboy wrote: »

The item was 'purchased' if you can call it that, last October.

It is now very nearly June.

Think yourself lucky it's £80.

The OP has brought all this on themselves.

It is clear Tozer...that you support people who are not prepared to accept they're to blame. Well done you. :rolleyes:

This is no different to a credit card for me and the charges are totally justified.

You clearly don't know anything about me and your comments make you look rather foolish - have a look at my comments on the Orange thread....:rolleyes:

Oh, and the charges are not justified. I note that you have not exactly opined the legal justification for your comments.