** DISCONTINUED** queenofhearts v BPS - ** DISCONTINUED **

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

Thus..

[EXC]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

Shall I let the ASA know about this? It's clearly misleading.

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

from ASA

The website included a number of disclaimers that UK Passport Offices were independent from HMPO and the government and that any fees paid directly to them were separate from the fee for the passport. However, the web pages contained a great deal of text and we considered that those disclaimers could easily be overlooked. We also considered that because the application process would be the main focus of consumers' attention, and they were able to proceed without reading the disclaimers, many consumers would therefore not read the disclaimers before proceeding with the application process. In the absence of a clear disclaimer the image of the passports was also likely to contribute to a misleading impression that the website was the official channel to obtain them.

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

Shall I let the ASA know about this? It's clearly misleading.

Don't see why not Give them this too if you like

[EXC]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

Work in progress

IN THE MANSFIELD COUNTY COURT
CLAIM No: XXXXXX

BETWEEN

UK Services & Support Ltd
CLAIMANT
And

xxxxx
DEFENDANT


WITNESS STATEMENT


1. I, xxx NAME xxx of xxxxxxx ADDRESS xxxxxx will state as follows:

2. I am a xxxxxxxxxxx and the defendant in these proceedings. I make this witness statement in support of my Defence in this case.

3. The matters referred to in this witness statement are within my own knowledge, except where I have indicated otherwise. Where any matters contained in this witness statement are not within my own knowledge, I have stated the source of my information.

4. I am a litigant in person and suffer from xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx which limits my mobility and I am reliant on Carers, the assistance of my family and the Multiple Sclerosis Association.

5. On 6^th October 2014 I asked my Carer to find me the number to contact the HM Passport Office so I could arrange a one day appointment at the HMPO in Peterborough to renew my passport in order to obtain a formal photographic identification document in my maiden name following a Divorce.

6. He searched online and gave me the telephone number for the 'Passport Office'. I am now aware he had visited the BritishPassportServices website (www.britishpassportservices.co.uk) of the claimant. I later saved a screenshot of the website in October 2014 [EXHIBIT A] as I felt it was very misleading.

7. I telephoned the number and a lady answered. I asked her if I was speaking with the Passport Office to which she confirmed that I was, and asked if she could assist. She stated her name was Andrea Vassell.

8. I informed her I wished to visit the Peterborough Passport Office on a Fast Track Next Day appointment and she confirmed that she was the right person to speak to for this.

9. Ms Vassell proceeded to tell me that to continue I must give her my email address and she would email me some details of forms to complete online and that she would call me back after she had received them.

10. I questioned Ms Vassell as to whether this was how passports were renewed these days as it did seem a little odd, but she assured me it was correct. I relied on her assurance as she had already confirmed I was speaking with the HMPO.

11. I received an email which contained a link to the website of BritishPassportServices and their online booking form.

12. I went through the online form and my Carer entered the replies to the questions asked. There did appear to be a lot of information asked for in order to simply book an appointment at the Passport Office.

13. Once the form was completed my Carer clicked to submit it and was re-directed to a ‘Hi-Pay’ Wallet website requesting payment of £117.60 which I understood to be the amount required to renew my passport. I entered my details of my AQUA MasterCard and submitted the payment.

14. I then waited for Ms Vassell to call me back as agreed.

15. I looked again at the BritishPassportServices website and realised that my carer and myself had been taken in by a ‘copycat site’. I saw on the front page there were headings such as 'Applications and Renewals' and 'Passport Application Service', along with photographs of passports bearing the Royal Arms logo. I then also realised that the website did not provide a passport application service; all it provided was an appointment service that is available free of charge through the official HM Passport Office Advice Line.

16. My carer and myself now strongly believe we were misled and deceived into understanding that we were dealing with the official HMPO service, contrary to Regulation 27(A) of The Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the Misrepresentation Act 1967.

17. After half an hour of waiting I was beginning to get concerned and telephoned the original number again. Ms Vassell answered the telephone which confirmed my suspicions as the real HMPO would have a large call centre to handle enquiries.

18. Ms Vassell's tone and attitude towards me on that second call was entirely different and I realised I had been taken in and that this was not the Passport Office.

19. I informed her that I did not require the service and asked for a refund. She refused and the call was ended. By refusing to allow me to cancel
a distance contract within the normal 14 day cancellation period the claimant beached Regulation 29 of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 and as such I had no obligation under the alleged contract as set out by Regulation 33.

20. On 6^th October 2014 at around xxxpm I telephoned AQUA Mastercard and told them what had happened. They opened an investigation and informed me they would give the Claimant opportunity to dispute my request for a refund.

21. On xxxxxxxxx 2014 I visited my local Post Office with my Carer and they helped me to complete the official Passport Forms and sent them off for me.

22. On the 7^th October 2014 I received an email from the Claimant stating an appointment had been made for me at Peterborough Passport Office on October 13^th 2014 [EXHIBIT B] As I had already told the Claimant I did not want their service and asked for a refund I was surprised at this but just ignored it as an error.

23. On around the 15^th October 2014 I started to receive numerous telephone calls from a variety of telephone numbers including xxxxx xxxxxxx, xxxx xxxxxxxx

25. Some of these calls were made by Andrea Vassell herself and she shouted at me that I must pay them and that I was 'committing fraud' by requesting a refund on my credit card and that they would 'send the police and bailiffs' to get the money.

25. On two occasions the calls were made by a male who told me he was a Bailiff and that he was ‘coming after me’ for the money.

26. On another occasion the same male voice told me he would 'charge me with fraud' and 'File a Police complaint'.

27. I also received a threatening SMS text message to my mobile telephone [EXHIBIT C] which stated “Ms xxxxxx, I have been advised that we may have to report you to the City of London Police regarding the false information you have provided to your card provider. See xxxx.signedcontract.org.uk/uxxxxx for full details as this is an act of Criminal Fraud’.

28. This, together with the accusation of ''Criminal fraud'' in the Claimant's Particulars of Claim and the numerous other texts, intimidating telephone calls and letters amount to harassment under the Harassment Act 1997.

29. I received a refund from my AQUA Mastercard on 3^rd November 2014 [EXHIBIT D]

30. AQUA Mastercard informed me they had blocked any further transactions being made to this company.

31. I continued to receive numerous telephone calls at all hours of the day and night and on XXXXXXX I contacted my local Police and a Police Officer came to my house where I made a complaint against the Claimant for harassment [EXHIBIT E] I felt that the nature of all these communications was overly aggressive and designed to frighten and intimidate me into paying.

32. I have also made a complaint through Action Fraud [EXHIBIT F]

33. I have spoken with Citizens Advice in Mansfield and Trading Standards consumer service. They both advised me not to pay and to ignore the calls, texts and emails. I put a block on my email account to stop any further messages arriving as I was finding them distressing and frightening.

34. In addition I registered for identity protection through CIFAS. This is a defence against ID fraud for anyone with good reason to believe that they are at risk.

35. On or around 23rd November I received a letter from the Claimant [EXHIBIT G] dated November 21st which stated that they would be taking me to court and stated I must pay within 14 days to avoid court action. The letter included a copy of a 'contract'. Until then I had not received a copy any contract, only a link to it on a web page. By not providing me with the contract in a durable medium at the point that the alleged contract was struck the claimant has breached Regulation 5, Regulation 16(1) and 16 (4) of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

36. I received the claim pack in this case from the Northampton County Court Business Centre on or around 15th December 2014.

37. I submitted my initial defence on 29th December 2014. [EXHIBIT H].

38. I have since been looking into the Claimant’s business and discovered that another of the Claimant’s websites ‘UK Passport Offices’ was the subject of an Advertising Standards Authority adjudication (ref A14-273276) [EXHIBIT I] which found that the website breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.9 (Qualification) and 3.17 (Prices). The ASA required that the site be removed or changed.

39. That website is still live and at the time of the adjudication looked exactly the same as the website BritishPassportServices. Although the ASA Adjudication is under appeal by the claimant I have confirmation from the ASA that the ruling still stands [EXHIBIT J]

40. In addition to the £117.60 'service' fee, the claimant is claiming numerous 'overdue invoice' fees [EXHIBIT K] which amount to penalties under Common Law and which breach regulation 5(1) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

41. Whilst researching to prepare this case in January and February 2015, I found that all my personal data, contract and payment details were publicly available online, as were those for all UK Services and Support's customers, without any controls over who could gain access to them whatsoever. The two websites concerned are passportdetails.co.uk and signedcontract.org.uk/u. and are those of the Claimant. Although, following complaints to the Information Commissioner's Office, the data was made password protected from 24 February 2015, the publication of the data was publicly available for nearly 5 months. The Defendant did not consent to that personal data being made freely accessible through the internet and as such the claimant has breached the First, Second, Third, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Data Protection Principles, as set out in s.4 and Schedule 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998.

42. In March 2015 I read an article in the Mail on Sunday about the Claimant’s company and discovered that many other people were receiving County Court claims and being subject to harassment and intimidation as a means of extracting fees from consumers[EXHIBIT L]

43. By using online research I also discovered a large number of other customers of UK Services & Support Ltd were receiving County Court Claims in a similar manner. There is even a list on the Claimant's website of County Court Judgments obtained against it's customers[EXHIBIT M] though I cannot check the veracity of this list.

44. On researching further with the assistance of my Daughter I discovered that several consumer websites have numerous testimonials of others who have been misled by the Claimant. These include Which? (Consumer's Association), MoneySavingExpert (Martin Lewis) and LegalBeagles.info (Consumer law help forum).

45. This helped to set my mind at rest that the harassment wasn’t just personal against me as up until that point I had been very scared and felt I was on my own in dealings with the Claimant.

46. I believe that the facts in this statement are true.

Signed:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


List of Exhibits
A Website Screenshot
B Appointment Notification E-mail
C Threatening Text Message
D AQUA MasterCard Refund Confirmation
E Police Complaint
F Action Fraud Complaint
G Letter From Claimant
H Defence
I ASA Adjudication
J ASA Statement
K Overdue Invoice Charges List
L Mail On Sunday Articles
M Claimant's CCJ List

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

Thanks EXC xx I've deleted earlier ones so only the most up to date one is on here, save confusion later.

Q'o'H is having a read through and whatnot now, and probably expand on a few bits.

Next stage on this is to call the court on March 18th to see if the hearing fee has been paid, then if it has bundles need to be in for the 8th April.

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

IN THE MANSFIELD COUNTY COURT

CLAIM No: XXXXXX

BETWEEN

UK Services & Support Ltd
CLAIMANT
And
Ann Thompson
DEFENDANT


WITNESS STATEMENT

I, ANN THOMPSON of ADDRESS xxxxxx will state as follows:

1. I am a Registered Nurse and the defendant in these proceedings. I make this witness statement in support of my Defence in this case.

2. The matters referred to in this witness statement are within my own knowledge, except where I have indicated otherwise. Where any matters contained in this witness statement are not within my own knowledge, I have stated the source of my information.

3. I am a litigant in person and suffer from a life limiting illness, Transverse Myelitis, Multiple Sclerosis and am sensory paralysed from chest down. which limits my mobility and I am reliant on Carers, the assistance of my family and the Multiple Sclerosis Association.

4. On 6th October 2014 I asked my Carer to find me the number to contact the HM Passport Office so I could arrange a one day appointment at the HMPO in Peterborough to renew my passport in order to obtain a formal photographic identification document in my maiden name following a Divorce.

5. He searched online and gave me the telephone number for the 'Passport Office'. I am now aware he had visited the BritishPassportServices website (www.britishpassportservices.co.uk) of the claimant. I later saved a screenshot of the website in October 2014 [EXHIBIT A] as I felt it was very misleading.

6. I telephoned the number given and a lady answered. I asked her if I was speaking with the Passport Office to which she confirmed that I was, and asked if she could assist. She stated her name was Andrea Vassell.

7. I informed her I wished to visit the Peterborough Passport Office on a Fast Track Next Day appointment and she confirmed that she was the right person to speak to for this.

8. Ms Vassell proceeded to tell me that to continue I must give her my email address and she would email me some details of forms to complete online and that she would call me back after she had received them.

9. I questioned Ms Vassell as to whether this was how passports were renewed these days as it did seem a little odd, but she assured me it was correct. I relied on her assurance as she had already confirmed I was speaking with the HMPO.

10. I received an email which contained a link to the website of BritishPassportServices and their online booking form.

11. I went through the online form and my Carer entered the replies to the questions asked. There did appear to be a lot of information asked for in order to simply book an appointment at the Passport Office.

12. Once the form was completed my Carer clicked to submit it and was re-directed to a ‘Hi-Pay’ Wallet website requesting payment of £117.60 which I understood to be the amount required to renew my passport. I entered my details of my AQUA MasterCard and submitted the payment. I then waited for Ms Vassell to call me back as agreed.

13. I looked again at the BritishPassportServices website and realised that my carer and myself had been taken in by a ‘copycat site’. I saw on the front page there were headings such as 'Applications and Renewals' and 'Passport Application Service', along with photographs of passports bearing the Royal Arms logo. I then also realised that the website did not provide a passport application service; all it provided was an appointment service that is available free of charge through the official HM Passport Office Advice Line.

14. My carer and myself now strongly believe we were misled and deceived into understanding that we were dealing with the official HMPO service, contrary to Regulation 27(A) of The Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the Misrepresentation Act 1967.

15. After a few minutes I was beginning to get concerned and telephoned the original number again. Ms Vassell answered the telephone which confirmed my suspicions as the real HMPO would have a large call centre to handle enquiries.

16. Ms Vassell's tone and attitude towards me on that second call was entirely different and I realised I had been taken in and that this was not the Passport Office.

17. I informed her that I did not require the service and asked for a refund. She refused and the call was ended. By refusing to allow me to cancel a distance contract within the normal 14 day cancellation period the claimant beached Regulation 29 of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 and as such I had no obligation under the alleged contract as set out by Regulation 33.

18. I telephoned AQUA Mastercard directly after speaking with Ms Vassell and told them what had happened. They opened an investigation and informed me they would give the Claimant opportunity to dispute my request for a refund.

19. On 7th October 2014 I visited my local Post Office with my Carer and they helped me to complete the official Passport Forms and sent them off for me.

20. On the 7th October 2014 I received an email from the Claimant stating an appointment had been made for me at Peterborough Passport Office on October 13th 2014 [EXHIBIT B] As I had already told the Claimant I did not want their service and asked for a refund I was surprised at this but just ignored it as an error.

21. On around the 15th October 2014 I started to receive numerous telephone calls from a variety of telephone numbers including 0203 5984885, 0161 6630072, 0203 6000115 and mobile numbers.

22. Some of these calls were made by Andrea Vassell herself and she shouted at me that I must pay them and that I was 'committing fraud' by requesting a refund on my credit card and that they would 'send the police and bailiffs' to get the money.

23. On two occasions the calls were made by a male who told me he was a Bailiff and that he was ‘coming after me’ for the money. On another occasion the same male voice told me he would 'charge me with fraud'
and 'File a Police complaint'.

24. I also received a threatening SMS text message to my mobile telephone [EXHIBIT C] which stated “Ms Thompson, I have been advised that we may have to report you to the City of London Police regarding the false information you have provided to your card provider. See AnnT.signedcontract.org.uk/ for full details as this is an act of Criminal Fraud’.

25. This, together with the accusation of ''Criminal fraud'' in the Claimant's Particulars of Claim and the numerous other texts, intimidating telephone calls and letters amount to harassment under the Harassment Act 1997.

26. I received a refund from my AQUA Mastercard on 3rd November 2014 [EXHIBIT D] AQUA Mastercard informed me they had blocked any further transactions being made to this company.

27. I continued to receive numerous telephone calls at all hours of the day and night and from 0203 5984885, 0161 6630072, 0203 6000115 and other numbers. I contacted my local Police and a Police Officer came to my house where I made a complaint against the Claimant for harassment [EXHIBIT E] I felt that the nature of all these communications was overly aggressive and designed to frighten and intimidate me into paying.

28. I have also made a complaint through Action Fraud [EXHIBIT F]

29. I have spoken with Citizens Advice in Mansfield and Trading Standards consumer service. They both advised me not to pay and to ignore the calls, texts and emails. I put a block on my email account to stop any further messages arriving as I was finding them distressing and frightening.

31. On or around 23rd November I received a letter from the Claimant [EXHIBIT G] dated November 21st which stated that they would be taking me to court and stated I must pay within 14 days to avoid court action. The letter included a copy of a 'contract'. Until then I had not received a copy any contract, only a link to it on a web page. By not providing me with the contract in a durable medium at the point that the alleged contract was struck the claimant has breached Regulation 5, Regulation 16(1) and 16 (4) of the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

32. I received the claim pack in this case from the Northampton County Court Business Centre on or around 15th December 2014.

33. I submitted my initial defence on 29th December 2014. [EXHIBIT H].

34. I have since been looking into the Claimant’s business and discovered that another of the Claimant’s websites ‘UK Passport Offices’ was the subject of an Advertising Standards Authority adjudication (ref A14-273276) [EXHIBIT I] which found that the website breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.9 (Qualification) and 3.17 (Prices). The ASA required that the site be removed or changed.

35. That website is still live and at the time of the adjudication looked exactly the same as the website BritishPassportServices. Although the ASA Adjudication is under appeal by the claimant I have confirmation from the ASA that the ruling still stands [EXHIBIT J]

36. In addition to the £117.60 'service' fee, the claimant is claiming numerous 'overdue invoice' fees [EXHIBIT K] which amount to penalties under Common Law and which breach regulation 5(1) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

37. Whilst researching to prepare this case in January and February 2015, I found that all my contract and payment details were publicly available online, as were the same details for all UK Services and Support's customers. The two websites concerned are passportdetails.co.uk and signedcontract.org.uk/u. The first website gives the 5 digit ID allocated by UK Services and Support to each customer and the second access to
contract details by using the ID just acquired. This concerned me as this put me at risk of identity theft.

38. I registered for identity protection through CIFAS. This is a defence against ID fraud for anyone with good reason to believe that they are at risk.

39. In March 2015 I read an article in the Mail on Sunday about the Claimant’s company and discovered that many other people were receiving County Court claims and being subject to harassment and intimidation as a means of extracting fees from consumers[EXHIBIT L]

40. By using online research I also discovered a large number of other customers of UK Services & Support Ltd were receiving County Court Claims in a similar manner. There is even a list on the Claimant's website of County Court Judgments obtained against it's customers[EXHIBIT M] though I cannot check the veracity of this list.

41. On researching further with the assistance of my Daughter I discovered that several consumer websites have numerous testimonials of others who have been misled by the Claimant. These include Which? (Consumer's Association), MoneySavingExpert (Martin Lewis) and LegalBeagles.info (Consumer law help forum).

42. This helped to set my mind at rest that the harassment wasn’t just personal against me as up until that point I had been very scared and felt I was on my own in dealings with the Claimant.

43. I do not believe I have any liability to the Claimant. I received no services from the Claimant. I cancelled any agreement I was misled into entering into and had no intention to contract with the Claimant whatsoever.

I believe that the facts in this statement are true.

Signed:________________________________

Date: ________________________________

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

need from Defendant....
G Letter From Claimant
B Appointment Notification E-mail


to add....
M Claimant's CCJ List
L Mail On Sunday Articles

already sorted....

List of Exhibits
A Website Screenshot






C Threatening Text Message



D AQUA MasterCard Refund Confirmation




E Police Complaint



F Action Fraud Complaint





J ASA Statement


K Overdue Invoice Charges List


H Defence



I ASA Adjudication - PDF http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...1&d=1427875164

N Confirmation of Payment

O - Invoice

[EXC]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May - bundle by 8th April

All looks very good & comprehensive.

Is it worth adding the Mail article as she was featured in it?

Interesting that the screenshot of the BPS site was October as the ASA adjudication requiring them to add more prominent disclaimers was published on 17 September and in fact they got a copy of the adjudication in August.

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May - bundle by 8th April

to add....
M Claimant's CCJ List
L Mail On Sunday Articles

xx

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May - bundle by 8th April

Bundle submitted this morning xx

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

Witness Statement received from RH.

Will post up once I've taken details out.

Working on a Skeleton Argument now to go back to Court before the hearing.

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

Claim No. xxxxxxxxxxxx
IN THE COUNTY COURT AT MANSFIELD
B E T W E E N:-


UK SERVICES & SUPPORT LTD
Claimant
And
ANN THOMPSON
Defendant

____________________________________________
SKELETON ARGUMENT FOR THE DEFENDANT
____________________________________________

1. The Defendant respectfully asks the court to deem the Claimant's witness statement as inadmissible due to it being filed out of time. The Defendant believes that the Claimant filed his witness statement late in an attempt to counter points made in the Defendant's defence.
2. Notwithstanding should the court accept the Claimant's witness statement as admissible the Defendant makes this skeleton argument in response to points made in the Claimant's witness statement.
3. Summary of Events between the Defendant and Claimant

1. The first contact the Defendant had with the Claimant was a telephone call made by the Defendant at 2.07pm on 6th October 2014 (Skeleton Exhibit 1) when she rang what she believed to be the HM Passport Office telephone number to request details of how best to obtain her replacement passport with her change of name. The Defendant was advised by the Claimant to complete a form online to book an appointment at a Passport Office and was sent a link by text message and email to access the form online.
2. The SMS text message and email arrived with a link to the form to book the appointment. This is evidenced on the Claimant's Witness Statement exhibit B as being sent at 2.11pm on 6th Oct 2014. As the defendant uses her phone as her primary contact vehicle she only saw the SMS text before clicking the link and completing the form. As you can see in the evidence the sender of the message was displayed as ‘Passport’. There is no mention on that message that the Claimant is not the official passport office.
3. The screenshots exhibited in the Claimant's witness statement are inaccurate as the link actually provided directed the Defendant to a different form than currently appears at that link. The Defendant does not recall any terms and conditions being displayed, only a form with sections to complete her personal information.
4. On clicking the link it took the defendant directly to a form. The defendant completed the form and made payment through the Hi Pay service as directed and awaited a call back from Andrea Vassell (the passport agent). When this didn’t materialise the Defendant telephoned the Claimant again at 2.42pm (Skeleton Exhibit 1). Because of the agents attitude towards her on this call she told the agent (Andrea Vassell) that she was cancelling and that she did not require the service and felt she had been misled into completing the booking form. The Defendant then received a text message with details of an appointment. She telephoned the Claimant again at NEED TO QUOTE TIME (Skeleton Exhibit 1) to ask why she had been sent that message despite having cancelled.
5. The Defendant did not visit the page detailed in Exhibit B at all.
6. The Defendant does not recall seeing or actioning any tick boxes.
7. The Defendant was required to make a signature on the screen but recalls that this was for adding the signature to her passport application.
8. At all times during the telephone conversations the Defendant relied on the positive assertions by Andrea Vassell that she was speaking to the HM Passport Office.
9. The Claimant's witness statement states that ''Furthermore our helpline numbers all start with a recorded message that is played before anyone connects to any of our agents. This welcome message (which cannot be skipped) states (1) the caller is phoning an independent company (2) we are not affiliated with the government (3) we are not connected to Her Majesty's Passport Office. This audio is played to each and every caller every time that they call us so that there can be no confusion as to our identity and so deny [sic] any misrepresentation of any kind''.
10. It is the Defendant's case that there was no recorded message of any kind at any point during the calls the Defendant made to the Claimant. The Claimants have added a recorded message to the beginning of calls since January 2015, however at the time the Defendant telephoned the Claimant there was no recorded message.

1. Compliance with Consumer Contract Regulations 2013
   1. The Claimant claims in his witness statement that that the defendant waived her rights to the 14 day cooling off period in which she had to cancel the alleged agreement under the Consumer Contract Regulations 2013. The Defendant does not recall being provided with any information or agreeing to her waiving her rights. She completed the form purely as directed by the Claimant’s agent, Andrea Vassell.
   2. In any event the Defendant cancelled the alleged contract by telephone on 2 occasions on 6 October, the same day on which the Claimant alleges that the alleged contract was signed.
   3. The Claimant's witness statement contains the following grossly contradictory statements on cancellation [emphasis supplied]: ''The defendant claims she telephoned our number again and spoke to the same agent. She claims the agent had a different tone and attitude towards her and refused cancellation of services. This is not true as if a customer requests cancellation the agents are [sic] sending an email with methods of cancellation so the defendant could cancel as soon as they wish. As you can see in EXHIBIT E there is no record of any cancellation request''.
      
      ''Please study EXHIBIT C to see that she agreed to waive the 14 day cooling off period and authorized us to begin the service immediately. By the time she cancelled all the services have [sic] been provided''.
   4. The claimant claims in his witness statement that he sent the Defendant a ''copy of the signed contract sent via durable media which is e-mail. Exhibit E proves that we did this''. The Defendant did not receive the contract in a durable form. The exhibit clearly shows that no copy of the signed contract was contained in the email. Rather, there is a link to it on a webpage, which is not a durable medium.
   5. The Department for Business Innovation and Skills Implementing Guidance for the Consumer Contracts (Information Cancellation and Additional Charges Regulations) (Skeleton Exhibit 2) provides that: ''An email is a durable medium. However, information contained via link to a website which may change, and which is embedded in an email is not.''
   6. The Defendant also relies on Admissibility – Directive 2002/92/EC on insurance mediation – Concept of a “durable medium” in Inconsult Anstalt v the Financial Market Authority (Finanzmarktaufsicht) 2010 (Skeleton Exhibit 3) which held that: ''The Court therefore limits itself to concluding that in order to qualify as a “durable medium”, an Internet site must allow for the unchanged reproduction of the information stored, that is, the information must be stored in a way that makes it impossible for the insurance intermediary to change it unilaterally.''
   7. The link (Claimant's witness statement Exhibit E) to the alleged contract is hosted on the documentsarchive.org.uk website which research by the Defendant has established is owned and operated by the Claimant. (Skeleton Exhibit 7)
   
   
2. Payment for 'services'
   1. When the Defendant had finished completing the ‘booking form’ she was asked to make payment of £117.60 by debit/credit card. She did this believing this was the payment for her passport renewal.
   2. After the telephone conversations with Andrea Vassell the defendant raised the issue with her credit card provider, Aquacard who immediately opened an investigation, which concluded in them refunding the payment. The Defendant was advised by them that they had given the Claimant 30 days to dispute the refund with them, which they did not.
   3. The Claimant claims in his witness statement that ''Under the Consumer Credit Act they [the Defendant] were able to cancel the payment made to us...'' but this is not the case. It is the Defendant's case that the Claimant should properly have disputed the refund with Aquacard and not the Defendant as it is only Aquacard who was capable of authorising and actioning the cancellation of the payment.
   
   
3. Breakdown of 'Services Delivered'
   1. Use of online booking form
      The Claimant's witness statement claims that ''The defendant visited our third party website www.BritishPassportServices.co.uk on 6 October 2014 and decided that they wanted to take out our Appointment Booking Package''. This is not the case. The Defendant did not require any services from the Claimant, she simply wanted to apply to Her Majesty's Passport Office for her passport. She only decided to book an appointment on the advice given during her initial phone call to the Claimant when they misrepresented themselves at the official passport office and informed her this was how to go about renewal of her passport. The Defendant now understands that in order for her to obtain a new passport no appointment was necessary.
   2. Booking the Passport Office Appointment
      The Defendant now understands that the information required to actually book an appointment on the official Passport Advice Line is only an individual's name and mobile telephone number. The rest of the information requested by the Claimant on their online booking form is unnecessary and superfluous.
   3. Letter, SMS and Email Confirmation
      This 'service' was unnecessary as it is the HM Passport Office that send a text message to confirm appointments. Notwithstanding the Defendant did not require an appointment.
   4. Document Checking Service
      As above this is 'service' was unnecessary. In any event the information provided by the Defendant is not entered into any form. It is apparent from the Defendant's investigations that the Claimant simply receives the completed form then telephones the official Passport Advice Line on 0300 222 0000 and pretends to be the Defendant, or a colleague/partner of the Defendant, in order to secure an appointment.
   5. Directions to Passport Office
      As above this is 'service' was unnecessary. The Defendant did not request, require or have any knowledge that she was ‘purchasing’ any such service. She has a sat nav and is quite capable of searching on Google Maps for her own directions.
   6. Queue Jumping Membership
      Once again this 'service' was not requested, required or provided. On investigating this ‘service’ further it appears that customers use appointments cancelled by other BPS customers. The Claimant's terms & conditions for this 'service' require the customer to lie about who made the appointment and conceal their identity at the Passport Office in order to gain access to the appointment slot.
   7. Passport Application Form Posted
      No passport application form was required from the Claimant nor was one received.
   8. In summary none of the above or any other services were required and/or received.
   
   
4. Police involvement/home visits
   1. The Claimant's witness statement states that ''The Defendant also claims that our agents said we will send the police and bailiffs which is not true''. The Defendant has already provided a witness statement exhibit of a text message she received from the Claimant (Defendant's witness statement exhibit C) that states ''Ms Thompson I have been advised that we may have to report you to the City of London Police regarding the false information you have provided to your card provider. See [web link] for full details of this act of criminal fraud''.
   2. The Claimant's witness statement states that ''We do not harass our customers and we don't send anyone to their house''. The Defendant wishes to draw the court's attention to the schedule of overdue invoice charges (Claimant's witness statement exhibit F) which clearly details a £50 charge for a ''Personal visit''. The defendant also wishes the court to take note of the ''Abusive language charge'' which the defendant believes illustrates the nature of the Claimant's business.
   
   
5. Forums, news articles and websites
   1. The claimant's witness statement states that ''Regarding the defendants [sic] statements about forums, news articles and websites where other people are complaining, these comments are made from individuals speaking about a range of different websites and do not represent the average customers [sic] experience with our company''.
   2. It is the Defendant's case that the Claimant knows full well that the Defendant was referring to the following news articles and forums which specifically and exclusively report on customers' experiences with the Claimant's company, namely :
      
      BBC News - ''Passport website [BritishPassportSevices.co.uk] sues its customers'' (Skeleton Exhibit 4)
      
      Mail On Sunday - ''Exposed: Copycat passport website boss [Richard Howard, UK Services & Support Ltd] who threatens customers with court...'' (Skeleton Exhibit 5)
      
      This Is Money - ''We track down the Passport Profiteer [Richard Howard] who sends threatening demands...'' (Skeleton Exhibit 6)
      
      LegalBEAGLES - UK Services & Support Ltd BritishPassportServices Copycat Website issues DISCUSSION (Skeleton Exhibit 8)
   
   
6. Action Fraud
   1. The Claimant's witness statement states that ''Due to this we can confirm that we reported this matter to the Police's Action Fraud [sic]''. However the Claimant has provided no evidence to confirm that he did so and the Defendant has not been contacted by either Action Fraud or the police.
   2. Conversely the Defendant herself contacted Action Fraud and obtained a crime reference number NFRC141200880929. The defendant also contacted Nottinghamshire Police and obtained a crime reference number 000445-1712201.
   
   
7. Data protection
   1. The Claimant's witness statement states that ''The Defendant claims that all her personal data is publicly available over the internet. This is not true.'' [emphasis supplied]
   2. It is the Defendant's case that the Claimant is deliberately attempting to mislead the court by using the current tense ''is''. The Claimant is referring and responding to the Defendant's defence at paragraph 37 in which she states that ''Whilst researching to prepare this case in January and February 2015, I found that all my contract and payment details were publicly available online''. [emphasis supplied]
   3. The Claimant amended their systems on or around the 25th February 2015 following complaints by consumers to the Information Commissioners Office. Customer’s personal details until that date were accessible by other members of the public.
   4. The first one I found was through a Google search while looking for information to assist with my defence of the Claim. I came across a Mr Robert Shepherd’s personal information. This concerned me and I checked to see if my details were also available publicly. I then tried a couple of random other names and obtained their personal information (which I deleted immediately) I typed the first name and initial of last name before the URL - so http://roberts.passportdetails.co.uk/ This gives you a screen with an application number and the individuals full name. You can then paste the application number at the end of the signedcontract.org URL http://roberts.signedcontract.org.uk/u37059
   5. Up until 25th February 2015 this gave direct access to links to the full personal details of Robert Shepherd, his invoice and breakdown of charges list.
   6. The same is true of my details, and many other peoples. AnnT.passportdetails.co.uk gives anyone the 5 digit applicant ID, which can be used http://annt.signedcontract.org.uk/u56194
   7. On 25th February it was changed to require a date of birth to be entered to access the documents and since around 1st March this changed to require a password submission to access the data. Therefore my personal details were publicly availably between 6th October 2014 when I was misled into completing the company's form online, and the 25th February 2015, a total of 6 months.
   8. The Claimant also states that contracts can only be found on links with over 25 characters. This is also not entirely true. By way of examples – these links all download directly UK Services & Support Customer private and personal information.
      http://documentsarchive.org.uk/machf...ment-hvfMH.pdf
      http://documentsarchive.org.uk/machf...ment-hvfPI.pdf
      http://documentsarchive.org.uk/machf...ment-hvfAP.pdf
      http://documentsarchive.org.uk/machf...ment-hvfPO.pdf
   
   
8. Key to Defendant's skeleton exhibits
   
   1) Defendant's phone records
   
   2) Business Innovation and Skills Implementing Guidance for the Consumer Contracts (Information Cancellation and Additional Charges Regulations) at page 16 https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...s-guidance.pdf
   
   3) Admissibility – Directive 2002/92/EC on insurance mediation – Concept of a “durable medium” in Inconsult Anstalt v the Financial Market Authority (Finanzmarktaufsicht) 2010 at paragraph 67 http://www.eftacourt.int/uploads/tx_...udgment_EN.pdf
   
   4) BBC News - ''Passport website [BritishPassportSevices.co.uk] sues its customers'' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31660829
   
   5) Mail On Sunday - ''Exposed: Copycat passport website boss [Richard Howard, UK Services & Support Ltd] who threatens customers with court...'' http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/b...ers-court.html
   
   6) This Is Money - ''We track down the Passport Profiteer [Richard Howard] who sends threatening demands...'' http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/n...ly-silent.html
   
   7) DocumentsArchive.co.uk (attached)
   
   8) LegalBEAGLES - UK Services & Support Ltd BritishPassportServices Copycat Website issues DISCUSSION http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...ues-DISCUSSION

[Amethyst]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May

The hearing for this case is tomorrow at 2pm.

RH would have received the skeleton argument this morning, and I dropped a copy into the court earlier today ( as it happens to be my local court too)

This afternoon he sent an email stating that he had discontinued the case with the court last Thursday - only the court know nothing about it.... so we've sent that message on to the court and calling them in the morning to see if the judge still wants to hear the case and whether we should attend.

Let you know soon as xx

[cards down]

Re: queenofhearts v BPS - hearing date 6 May - rec'd RH's WS - prep skels

What will happen about any claim for costs the defendant may have if they do not need to attend?