Desp[erate appeal please help: small claims soliciotr LBA dedline expired

aworrieddriver

Quentin wrote: »

As bod has told you noddle is a free resource for checking if you have any ccjs registered against you

Thanks


Im sorry to ask this again, but is it possible to get a consensus opinion on this please


hxxp://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2i9pkox&s=9#.VkPKs6RybIU


treat this as an LBA or not. please read the last paragraph of it and reply. im after a consensus,


yes ive read the sticky thread by XX lazy daisy


My question isn't whether its compliant etc... with an LBA or not. it clearly isn't. But my question more specifically is whether it is an LBA or not.


if yes, ten definitely needs a reply.


If not, then ignore?


Please reply. yes or no. thanks


Again please remember, Im not asking whether its compliant or not, but is it considered an LBA or not

aworrieddriver

bod1467 wrote: »

Check your credit file with, say, Noddle? (Hasn't this been mentioned previously?)

Hi Bod


appreciate your views on my post #92


thanks

aworrieddriver

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes, April 2015 is the current version to look at.

Dear CM


I would really appreciate your view on post #92.


thanks

aworrieddriver

bargepole wrote: »

Not odd at all, IMHO.

.

Dear bargepole


appreciate your view on my post 92 please

aworrieddriver

The_Deep wrote: »

QUOTE]


Hi Deep


I would appreciate your views too on post 92 please

aworrieddriver

HO87 wrote: »

Dear HO


I appreciate your views as well on this post 92 please


Thanks

aworrieddriver

Coupon-mad wrote: »

Yes, April 2015 is the current version to look at.

Dear CM


Ive seen the threads from Gan on pepipoo and read through many of them


Do you know if he is a member here too?


if you do , are you able to get his opinion on my question in post #92?


Thanks

Quentin

aworrieddriver wrote: »

Thanks


Im sorry to ask this again, but is it possible to get a consensus opinion on this please


hxxp://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2i9pkox&s=9#.VkPKs6RybIU


treat this as an LBA or not. please read the last paragraph of it and reply. im after a consensus,


yes ive read the sticky thread by XX lazy daisy


My question isn't whether its compliant etc... with an LBA or not. it clearly isn't. But my question more specifically is whether it is an LBA or not.


if yes, ten definitely needs a reply.


If not, then ignore?


Please reply. yes or no. thanks


Again please remember, Im not asking whether its compliant or not, but is it considered an LBA or not

Your request for a consensus is pointless.


You cannot take a vote on a forum to decide how you should proceed over this massive bill!


Coupon-mad has advised you what to do in #79

aworrieddriver

Quentin wrote: »

Your request for a consensus is pointless.


You cannot take a vote on a forum to decide how you should proceed over this massive bill!


Coupon-mad has advised you what to do in #79

Dear Quentin


I feel I didn't make myself clear, apologies.


Im not asking how to proceed over this massive bill.


Am asking whether we think the letter , as stated in its last paragraph, " please note that this letter is to be confirmed a letter before claim for the purpose of the Practise direction on Pre-action conduct", should be treated as an LBA/LBCCC or not. maybe my question wasn't clear. My direct question is, is it, or isn't it an LBA, irrespective of whether its compliant with the PD or not.


If it should be treated as an LBA/LBCCC, then I will reply. So , yes, that's my decision, and Im not waiting for a consensus decision on that.


But if its not an LBA, whether compliant or not, then I will ignore.


I have already replied to the first one regarding my current car, but the bill for the older car is considerably higher, and I'm now re-thinking whether I should reply or not.


and hence my question


regards




Thanks

DollyDee_2

aworrieddriver wrote: »

Dear Quentin


I feel I didn't make myself clear, apologies.


Im not asking how to proceed over this massive bill.


Am asking whether we think the letter , as stated in its last paragraph, " please note that this letter is to be confirmed a letter before claim for the purpose of the Practise direction on Pre-action conduct", should be treated as an LBA/LBCCC or not. maybe my question wasn't clear. My direct question is, is it, or isn't it an LBA, irrespective of whether its compliant with the PD or not.


If it should be treated as an LBA/LBCCC, then I will reply. So , yes, that's my decision, and Im not waiting for a consensus decision on that.


But if its not an LBA, whether compliant or not, then I will ignore.


I have already replied to the first one regarding my current car, but the bill for the older car is considerably higher, and I'm now re-thinking whether I should reply or not.


and hence my question


regards




Thanks

The final paragraph actually states "this letter is considered to be a letter before claim" etc (not 'confirmed' to be a letter before claim) so as per CM's post #79, send a robust reply.