01274663293

01274 663293 Rang saying CO OP Plus and told me my insurance has expired and told me that they could save me money.
I told them belong to TPS and stop calling and I would now call the Police.
Went online to TPS to log a complaint

Just got another call from 01274 663293 with a recorded message about claiming some sort of refund. Hung up and then tried to make a call out. The line was blocked with music playing, this caused great distress as I needed to call my wife's doctor urgently, thanks a bundle 01274 663293.
p.s. We are registered with TPS!

unhappy person having been caught by this company already, people are only employed by this company for 3 months. there must be more too many people in Bradford that need a job for a short time

I just let it go to answerphone & it went dead.

DON'T EVEN SPEAK TO THEM - THEY'RE VULTURES. See this Guardian article:-
Redress Claims' no win, no fee PPI call cost a packet

A mis-sold payment protection insurance phone call ended up with Redress Claims taking £4,330 from your credit card

   Share 3
   inShare1
   Email

   Margaret Dibben
       Margaret Dibben    
       The Observer, Saturday 27 August 2011 22.59 BST    

Redress Claims phoned offering to help claim back mis-sold payment protection insurance on a no win, no fee basis. We discussed my credit cards, loans and mortgage and they asked for my credit card details. The fee would be £4,330 and they would send an application pack for me to sign and return straight away so they could proceed. It arrived on 7 June and I started to gather information but three days later was rushed into hospital. After recuperating with friends, I returned home on 4 July and discovered that Redress Claims had taken £4,330 from my credit card on the day of the phone call. I am now paying interest, which I can't afford.

I was told I'd missed the cooling-off period, which they never mentioned. They claimed they have already done work worth £3,466 and, if I cancel now, I will get back only £864. I feel I'm being blackmailed.
JC, Preston, Lancashire

I wonder how people at Redress Claims sleep at night. As you now know, reclaiming mis-sold PPI premiums, either from the lender or through the Financial Ombudsman Service, is completely free. I wanted to know just what Redress Claims does for £4,330 but it wouldn't talk to me, even though you gave your authority for the firm to discuss your complaint with me. It just emailed to say you had resolved your concerns and the matter is closed and subject to legal privilege, whatever that is. I had asked why it had taken money from you upfront after calling it a no win, no fee service. It said it charges in several different ways and it is up to the client to choose. You hadn't even chosen to do business with the company before it took your money.

I asked Redress Claims for a complete refund as you had not agreed to sign up, but it said the telephone call created a verbal contract. You could have cancelled in the cooling-off period but weren't told about this and were soon in hospital. It refuses to release you from the contract. The company would still talk only to you, not me, and you felt so pressured that you did send in a completed application form.

At that point, Redress Claims discovered it had overcharged you. Claims management firms charge a percentage, typically 25% plus VAT, of the total compensation received. Apparently the original saleswomen had written down a higher figure than you were actually claiming. It is refunding £2,740, which you have accepted.

You can email Margaret Dibben at your.problems@observer.co.uk or write to Margaret Dibben, Your Problems, The Observer, Kings Place, 90 York Way, London N1 9GU and include a telephone number. Do not enclose SAEs or original documents. The newspaper accepts no legal responsibility for advice.

   Print this

Article history
Money
Series

   Your problems with Anna Tims

More features

More letters

Just received a call from this number and didn't know it was bogus.  Unfortunately tried to call back as I was was expecting a call from another person.  I need to know that I can stilll use my land line as my mother is 90 years old and I need to contact her every day

http://www.ico.gov.uk/news/latest_news/2012/s ... s-28112012.aspx

News release: 28 November 2012

The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has today served monetary penalties totalling £440,000 on two owners of a marketing company which has plagued the public with millions of unlawful spam texts over the past three years.

This is the first time that the ICO has used its power to issue a monetary penalty for a serious breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) since these powers were approved in January 2012.

The ICO is also currently considering issuing penalties to three other companies believed to be acting in breach of the regulations as the office continues its crackdown on the illegal marketing industry.

Information Commissioner, Christopher Graham, said:

“The public have told us that they are distressed and annoyed by the constant bombardment of illegal texts and calls and we are currently cracking down on the companies responsible, using the full force of the law.

“In March we set up a survey https://www.snapsurveys.com/swh/surveylogin.asp?k=134674895144 on the ICO website so people can tell us about any unwanted texts and calls they have been receiving. So far we have received over 60,000 responses. We know the majority of these messages and calls have been made by companies who try to remain anonymous in the hope they can profit by selling personal information to claims management companies and other marketing organisations. We are using the information provided by the public to identify those responsible.”

Tetrus Telecoms
Today’s news comes after an 18-month investigation into the activities of Tetrus Telecoms. The company is jointly owned by Christopher Niebel and Gary McNeish. The ICO became aware of Tetrus Telecoms after receiving intelligence in May 2011 that the company was sending huge volumes of unsolicited text messages from offices in Stockport and Birmingham, without the consent of the recipient and without identifying the sender – both of which are legal requirements under the PECR. Any replies were then used to generate leads that were sold to other companies at a considerable profit (SEE DIAGRAM) http://www.ico.gov.uk/news/latest_news/2012/~ ... nfographic.ashx


The ICO’s investigation included raids at the company’s Stockport premises, in August 2011, and the Manchester home of Niebel, in February this year. The evidence obtained showed Tetrus was using unregistered pay as you go sim cards to send out as many as 840,000 illegal text messages a day with an income of £7,000 - £8,000 a day.

Examples of the text messages sent out by Tetrus Telecoms include:

CLAIM TODAY you may be entitled to £3500 for the accident you had. To claim free, reply CLAIM to this message. To opt out text STOP. Thank you
URGENT! If you took out a Bank Loan prior to 2007 then you are almost certainly entitled to £2300 in compensation. To claim reply 'YES'
You have still not claimed the compensation you are due for the accident you had. To claim then pls reply CLAIM. To opt out text STOP
The company was set up in December 2009, and is believed to have been operational since this time. The two men made hundreds of thousands of pounds profit during the course of three years.

Niebel has now been ordered to pay a penalty of £300,000, while McNeish, who appears to have taken less out of the business, has been fined £140,000.

The ICO has connected the company to over 400 complaints to its office about spam texts linked to Tetrus.

The Information Commissioner continued:

“The two individuals we have served penalties on today made a substantial profit from the sale of personal information. They knew they were breaking the law and the trail of evidence uncovered by my office highlights the scale of their operations.

“We will continue to work with the relevant authorities as well as the network providers to ensure companies like this are punished. We’re also working with the Ministry of Justice to target claims management companies who purchase this information breaching the industry regulations, the Data Protection Act, as well as electronic marketing regulations.

“Our message to the public is that if you don’t know who sent you a text message then do not respond, otherwise your details may be used to generate profits for these unscrupulous individuals. Together we can put an end to this unlawful industry that continues to plague our daily lives.”

Further information about the ICO’s investigation into Tetrus Telecoms can be found in the monetary penalty notices available on the ICO's monetary penalty notices page.

Further action
Niebel and McNeish are also facing prosecution from the ICO for failing to notify that Tetrus Telecoms was processing personal information. Notification is a legal requirement for organisations under the Data Protection Act punishable by a penalty up to £5,000 in the Magistrates Court, and a potentially unlimited fine in the Crown Court.

It is important that any company that has bought data from Tetrus or Niebel or McNeish in the past, now carefully checks that the proper customer consents have been obtained and that they are acting within the law. We are working with the Ministry of Justice to consider whether further enforcement action should be taken against any of these associated companies, including the cancellation of their authorisation to operate.  

The ICO has set up a survey https://www.snapsurveys.com/swh/surveylogin.asp?k=134674895144 which people can use to send us the details of any unwanted marketing texts and calls.

The information provided is being used to help identify those companies responsible.

We are currently considering issuing penalties to three other companies for breaching the PECR. We are not identifying these companies now, as this could jeopardise our investigations and evidence gathering, however you can find out more about what action we are taking here http://www.ico.gov.uk/enforcement/action.aspx

How do spam texts make money?

http://www.ico.gov.uk/news/latest_news/2012/~ ... nfographic.ashx

Received a call from this number on 14th Jan.
I asked them not to call again, but received another call on 17th Jan.

Just had a silent call from this number.

TPS etc are all a waste of space, all I can do is store in my phone so I know it is a junk call from the ringtone.

I would buy a TrueCall today but I don't like being tied to paying a subscription to be able to interrogate the unit from my computer.  I keep hoping that someone will produce one that can be programmed and interrogated directly from my computer.

Very similar - also on TPS - nobody at the other end

At least twice today, yesterday and the day before - I have the number written down, when it comes up on caller display, I don't answer. Is this another of these automated calls that select numbers at random? I am sick of it!!!!!!!!!

Called this morning and asked for my wife. I asked who wanted her. He said Coverplus Insurance re House Insurance.  Our area of Yorkshire was being targetted as we are not in a flood or subsidence risk area. Told him we are on TPS. He said they checked before ringing and we are not on it. When I said we had just renewed it he asked when, who with & how much, which I declined to say. He rang off.
I then rang the TPS who confirmed we registered in 1996 and are still registered.  They will send a complaint form for me to return.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2013/feb/03/redress-claims-never-saw-cash

Redress Claims customers who never saw their cash

Customers who paid Redress Claims to get PPI money find they are out of pocket

Anna Tims

The Observer, Sunday 3 February 2013

The letters are depressingly similar:

London RT of London was cold called by a company called Redress Claims which promised to reclaim mis-sold payment protection insurance for her on a no-win no-fee basis. "I paid £450 for them to look into potential claims on each credit card and was told I'd get the money back if the claim was unsuccessful. I've never received any claim money, or a refund."

AB of Humberside paid Redress Claims £1,700 in 2011 after being cold called. "We trusted them, as we are desperate financially. They did obtain £958 for mis-sold PPI on a mortgage for which they charged an additional fee of £287. And £1,419, £608 of which they pocketed despite the promise in their terms and conditions that they would deduct no more than 25%."

SG from Coventry found that £3,855 had been removed from her credit card after a cold caller from Redress Claims gave her a hard-sell in April 2011. "I never received any bill or acknowledgement of this payment and they've since demanded further payments," she says.

PR of Southport, Merseyside paid a similar upfront fee which he was told was refundable if his six claims were unsuccessful. One claim was won but he was told to pay an extra £149 per claim to a company called Credit Clear Services to have the outstanding five resolved.

R E-H found £3,245 removed from his account, £590 of it for invalid claims. "I made more than 20 attempts to get the £590 back but none of my messages was replied to. They managed to get me £120 back from one credit card issuer and £32 on another and charged me £100 fee for each. Now I've had a letter from Credit Clear Services telling me my contract has passed to them and I must pay £99 for them to proceed."

After a long overdue investigation by the Ministry of Justice, Redress Claims's licence to trade was suspended last month due to breaches of the code of conduct. "We will take further action if breaches are not corrected," says an MoJ spokesman.

Given that a suspension can be lifted after three months if a company gets its act together, and given that Redress Claims will have made a consoling profit in the 18 months it has been allowed to operate, this is unlikely to pain its director, Naman Hussain.

Suspension does not stop companies dealing with refund requests from customers whose cases are pending, and the MoJ recommends they write asking for one.

Simon Helliwell, director of Credit Clear Services, which provided "auditing and legal services" for the company, declares that Hussain will be pursuing "other interests" and would not seek to reinstate the licence when the three months is up.

"We've agreed to take the thousands of unresolved Redress Claims' cases off them for no extra charge and will proceed on a no-win no-fee basis," says Helliwell, who insisted that "in comparison with many in the market Redress Claims was not that bad".

He was vague, however, about what percentage of any claim would be deducted in fees. "We'll abide by Redress Claims's terms and conditions," he says and admitted he didn't know what percentage these specified.

As compensation claims for mis-sold PPI can be made for free with a form provided by the Financial Ombudsman Service http://www.fsa.gov.uk/consumerinformation/pro ... /claim-back-ppi , anyone who paid Redress Claims by credit card should consider applying for a refund from their card issuer, which is held jointly liable under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act. Some debit card companies also offer chargeback if a company is in breach of contract.

Sadly, though, many are likely to be left out of pocket and will have learnt NEVER to hand bank details to a company that COLD CALLS.

Anna Tims writes your wrongs. Got a problem you want Anna to look into? Send your dilemmas to your.problems@observer.co.uk

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2013/feb/03/redress-claims-never-saw-cash

Redress Claims customers who never saw their cash

Customers who paid Redress Claims to get PPI money find they are out of pocket

Anna Tims

The Observer, Sunday 3 February 2013

The letters are depressingly similar:

London RT of London was cold called by a company called Redress Claims which promised to reclaim mis-sold payment protection insurance for her on a no-win no-fee basis. "I paid £450 for them to look into potential claims on each credit card and was told I'd get the money back if the claim was unsuccessful. I've never received any claim money, or a refund."

AB of Humberside paid Redress Claims £1,700 in 2011 after being cold called. "We trusted them, as we are desperate financially. They did obtain £958 for mis-sold PPI on a mortgage for which they charged an additional fee of £287. And £1,419, £608 of which they pocketed despite the promise in their terms and conditions that they would deduct no more than 25%."

SG from Coventry found that £3,855 had been removed from her credit card after a cold caller from Redress Claims gave her a hard-sell in April 2011. "I never received any bill or acknowledgement of this payment and they've since demanded further payments," she says.

PR of Southport, Merseyside paid a similar upfront fee which he was told was refundable if his six claims were unsuccessful. One claim was won but he was told to pay an extra £149 per claim to a company called Credit Clear Services to have the outstanding five resolved.

R E-H found £3,245 removed from his account, £590 of it for invalid claims. "I made more than 20 attempts to get the £590 back but none of my messages was replied to. They managed to get me £120 back from one credit card issuer and £32 on another and charged me £100 fee for each. Now I've had a letter from Credit Clear Services telling me my contract has passed to them and I must pay £99 for them to proceed."

After a long overdue investigation by the Ministry of Justice, Redress Claims's licence to trade was suspended last month due to breaches of the code of conduct. "We will take further action if breaches are not corrected," says an MoJ spokesman.

Given that a suspension can be lifted after three months if a company gets its act together, and given that Redress Claims will have made a consoling profit in the 18 months it has been allowed to operate, this is unlikely to pain its director, Naman Hussain.

Suspension does not stop companies dealing with refund requests from customers whose cases are pending, and the MoJ recommends they write asking for one.

Simon Helliwell, director of Credit Clear Services, which provided "auditing and legal services" for the company, declares that Hussain will be pursuing "other interests" and would not seek to reinstate the licence when the three months is up.

"We've agreed to take the thousands of unresolved Redress Claims' cases off them for no extra charge and will proceed on a no-win no-fee basis," says Helliwell, who insisted that "in comparison with many in the market Redress Claims was not that bad".

He was vague, however, about what percentage of any claim would be deducted in fees. "We'll abide by Redress Claims's terms and conditions," he says and admitted he didn't know what percentage these specified.

As compensation claims for mis-sold PPI can be made for free with a form provided by the Financial Ombudsman Service http://www.fsa.gov.uk/consumerinformation/pro ... /claim-back-ppi , anyone who paid Redress Claims by credit card should consider applying for a refund from their card issuer, which is held jointly liable under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act. Some debit card companies also offer chargeback if a company is in breach of contract.

Sadly, though, many are likely to be left out of pocket and will have learnt NEVER to hand bank details to a company that COLD CALLS.

Anna Tims writes your wrongs. Got a problem you want Anna to look into? Send your dilemmas to your.problems@observer.co.uk

This number 01274663293 has been calling my private landline.  Rings off quickly.  Just a nusiance.

They are still at it! Just recieved a call 20 mins ago. why can't they be stopped. I am registered with TPS.

i currently left there place , what they do is wrong and i apologise to everyone who has been harrassed for there inconsiderate manner, i always was willing to make the customer feel confortable but that type of job is too stressfull, at the end of it you go home, and you think of how many people you have stressed out , its not fair and once again i apologies

Call to home no., today appx 4pm

'Cameron' from 'Cover Plus' about home insurance, which is due for renewal, is that right Sir?'
Me - 'Who told you that?'
'You are eligible for a quote from us'
Me - 'I've never heard of you, who told you I was due for renewal?' (NB I am not btw but wasn't telling him)
'It's on our database.'
Me - 'What database is that?'
'We are agents for 'Royal Southern Alliance, do you pay by direct debit?'
Me - 'I've never heard of Royal Southern Alliance either, who are they?'
'You are eligible for a quote if you pay by direct debit, do you pay by direct debit?'
Me - 'I am not telling you anything about my affairs.'
'What harm can it do to just answer if you are on direct debit?'
Me - 'Every harm, as I said......' phone call disconnected by 'Cameron'

Annoying but just don't give them anything to get their teeth into.

picked up and went dead

Just had a call from this number and they were after selling me home insurance. According to 'their records', my insurance is due for renewal. I told her it wasnt and after several minutes of her asking me when it was due and me dodging the question, she finally cleared off. Have jus tred ringing it back to get the company's name and, surprisingly, the number isn't recognised! Will avoid them in future!