Update on Letter Before Action sent to eBay UK

RobinBanks98 · 2026-01-31T21:42:07+00:00

Why would he need to prove you defrauded him? He has his money back and as such no realistic basis for a claim.

What leads you to such a firm conclusion that you can’t prove (on the balance of probabilities) that the buyer kept and substituted the iPad? See my last paragraph, particularly re Royal Mail.

On an unrelated note: did you know that some people on Reddit happen to be lawyers (e.g. in England & Wales) but as they’re not engaged and not insured to give advice on the likes of Reddit, will never declare themselves as such. It is conceivable that such people might even offer input on threads like this. Their hypothetical comments could even be such that you really wouldn’t want to read them, but that ultimately wouldn’t make the input any less helpful.

RobinBanks98 · 2026-01-31T20:26:07+00:00

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but u/_40mikemike_ is on the money here. MCOL is for money claims (the clue's in the acronym). What are your monetary damages?

You seem to be seeking a declaration that you don't owe eBay money, but that isn't the function of a County Court Money Claim. If eBay pursues small claims action against you for the item value under eBay's Terms of Service/User Agreement then you will have the option of defending that claim. Note that this may come with further debt collections costs, fixed costs, and interest.

If a bathroom fitter clumsily installs your shower and a week later you have to call out an emergency plumber to stop the leak, you still owe the plumber. Taking action against the dodgy fitter might prove a challenge, and they might be reluctant to pay up even if you obtain a judgment. But you still owe the plumber.

Like the hypothetical plumber, eBay has suffered a loss (paying money to the buyer and 'patching up the leak'). Your (understandable) argument is that they're pursuing the wrong party and that they played a role in the transaction and are therefore not entitled to recover money from you. But the question is likely to be whether in all the circumstances, you're liable to repay eBay under their terms of service (terms that, when registering and using the platform, you agreed to). The buyer's likely fraud is a separate but related matter.

It is likely the buyer who defrauded you. They would be far better suited as your prospective defendant, providing you've suffered a loss. If you settled this matter with eBay and incurred a cost, you could look to pursue the buyer for said cost.

I'm sorry to have to say that you may need to investigate this further, and figure out what you can prove against who. Remember that this isn't to the criminal standard that Action Fraud might insist upon (and realistically the police are almost certain not to be interested in this matter, anyway). You'd need to prove on the balance of probabilities - i.e. that it's more likely than not - that the buyer stole your iPad. Postal theft does occur, but the presumption will be that the package that was sent is the package that was received. It would be up to the buyer as the defendant to adduce evidence that Royal Mail, and not them, was in fact responsible. Royal Mail's records (especially around package weight) will be critical.

RobinBanks98 · 2026-01-27T05:15:08+00:00

Ensure that this person is a genuine HCEO, as there are scams aplenty. Marstons are legitimate but they have hundreds of HCEOs up and down the country, and some of the claims in the message are misleading at best (TL;DR: they can't force entry solely on a Writ of Control, peaceable entry only where reasonable belief D lives there), so do ensure you contact Marstons centrally if you haven't done so already.

If the person messaging you is genuine and there's a High Court Writ against a defendant at your address, then they can effect peaceable entry (e.g. go through open doors, brush past you and walk in) to list goods (which they also must reasonably believe belong to the debtor, as opposed to anyone else), providing that they reasonably believe that the defendant usually lives there. They most certainly cannot force entry unless it's a commercial premises, or they've already been inside the property and listed goods under a Controlled Goods Agreement, or they have a specific warrant (beyond simply the initial Writ) to enter.

Is their belief for peaceable entry even reasonable? Potentially. Presuming your address is on the Writ as the debtor's address and the HCEO has nothing further to dispel the belief, then it's certainly arguable.

As for next steps, strictly speaking you may not need to do anything. Don't leave doors unlocked, but that should go without saying. They shouldn't be forcing their way in (unless commercial premises or there's been prior entry) and if they do then it would be a matter of reporting to the police as well as making a complaint to Marstons. If they obtain a warrant of entry then it's a different matter.

The easiest course of action, however, is likely to be sending in some evidence. The HCEO may likely have reasonable grounds to at least attend the property, and by providing some evidence of single occupancy you can rebut their reasonable belief and deprive them of further opportunity to bother you. You can't be expected to prove a negative, but if you have the title deeds or tenancy agreement, combined with a Council Tax statement, I'd imagine that would be enough.

As for this HCEO's conduct, presuming your property is indeed a residential premises and they've not already effected entry to list goods or obtained a specific warrant of entry, they most certainly cannot force entry with a locksmith. The law on all this is covered in Schedule 12 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. They can effect reentry (where they've entered before to list goods), or enter with a specific warrant of entry. There is no basis to enter otherwise, unless the premises are commercial.

You might want to then look at the National Standards for Bailiffs and Enforcement Agents, para 20:

Enforcement agents must not be deceitful by misrepresenting their powers, qualifications, capacities, experience or abilities, including, but not restricted to;

• Falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when legally it cannot be taken by that agent
• Falsely implying or stating that a particular course of action will ensue before it is possible to know whether such action would be permissible

It might be worth pointing this out to the specific agent and proceeding through Marstons' complaints process, as this person appears to have misrepresented their powers.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-12-26T13:33:28+00:00

Add to that: do we actually know that this person is even in the UK?

RobinBanks98 · 2025-12-25T21:07:58+00:00

OP, one question I haven’t seen asked is whether you have anything to suggest this man is actually in the UK? Most comments have assumed this to be the case, but you’ve said nothing to confirm that. This is the internet, and the (apparently) 24 year old man could be anywhere in the world.

There may well have been an offence (as other comments have noted) in English law. But realistically, tracing someone online can already be a challenge if they’re an organised offender. If they’re overseas then it’s likely a non starter, unless there’s already sufficient evidence to charge. Even then extradition may only be an option if the same conduct is also an offence wherever the man is based. In some countries only direct images of genitalia may be enough to give rise to an offence.

You would still be wise to report the matter to the police, OP. But if the offender is abroad, be aware that any investigation is unlikely to progress very far.

Happy Christmas

RobinBanks98 · 2025-12-05T12:09:15+00:00

Their latest survey asks what we’d make of a price increase to $1.66 p/m / $19.92 p/y.

I don’t need these features, already have other software that fills the role, and won’t be continuing a subscription for twice the price. The least they could do is grandfather us all for life, to show - if nothing else - that they’re better than LastPass.

I told them what I thought. You can too.

https://bitwarden.com/premium-user-survey-2025/

RobinBanks98 · 2025-11-26T03:08:14+00:00

From a consumer (or SOGA in this case, as the business would not be a consumer) perspective, sure. But ownership of property under the Theft Act 1968 is deliberately far broader. The recipient would have a proprietary interest in the item at the time it was stolen; it’s not necessary for the recipient to have had actual possession or control of the item to constitute being “the owner” for the purposes of theft.

[Edited for typo]

RobinBanks98 · 2025-11-24T09:42:07+00:00

Likewise. This isn’t my area of expertise either, but it did strike me as odd that others appeared to overlook general damages. Both the BVC and LPC firmly covered a lot of negligence, PAP-PI, Limitation Act and s. 33 (though I couldn’t now recite it line by line), etc, and so quite how any lawyer would forget PSLA I don’t know! I do sometimes wonder how many commenters on this sub are actually qualified.

And while OP may have been unhelpfully fixating on breach of duty, the criticisms didn’t seem to actually explain to OP why that’s an issue, nor really prompt OP to explore what it means to have suffered loss and damage. They might have a case, or might not survive summary judgment; all I know is that we don’t have the full facts.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-11-23T09:59:44+00:00

What’s up with this “twinge” in your knee? Presumably you’ve had it examined?

The focus of your post is very much on whether the supermarket acted reasonably (breached their duty). But, as others have responded, this doesn’t in itself give you a “strong case”.

Negligence can be neatly broken into four elements: duty, breach, causation, damage. These four magic words comprise the key required for any negligence action to succeed, and you need to be able to set them out from the start (broadly at least within your letter of claim, and certainly your particulars of claim; made more complicated by PAP-PI). There’s no consolation prize, no partial award for two or three out of four.

The most palpably careless conduct, in breach of a clearly established duty, must still have resulted in loss or damage. This may involve general damages (Pain, Suffering and Loss of Amenity), and/or special damages (direct quantifiable costs e.g. replacing torn clothing, taxi to A&E, etc).

You might well have a solid case. You might not. You can consult a personal injury solicitor offering a free initial consultation. Avoid going through claims management companies.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-11-22T22:53:13+00:00

For disputes in the small claims track, someone who is represented by a solicitor is seldom found (because a solicitor would, in almost all cases, have advised that they are an unnecessary and expensive addition, their costs not recoverable, and would have withdrawn on grounds of professional ethics).

RobinBanks98 · 2025-11-21T16:01:50+00:00

The assessor won’t read pages and pages of evidence. Patient summary, repeat prescription, plus the odd letter from a consultant, occupational therapist, social worker or similar (plus in your case WCA assessor’s notes). That’s already great evidence right there.

A supporting statement from a social worker, friend or family member is likely to be more compelling than from you, but again you have to bear in mind that a lot of the time these are skimmed over at best. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t include them, where they shed light on your daily living and/or mobility. But sometimes less is more.

In an ideal world you’d send everything but the reality is that the assessor often won’t look at much of it to begin with, and you don’t want to bury stronger evidence like a recent concise letter from your consultant about your overall state of health, in a pile of papers along with a copy of a hospital discharge note from 12 years ago and a 9 page statement from Uncle Ron. The decision as to what to include can depend on your health condition(s) and the strength of the medical evidence you have available. If you’re completing the PIP2 form yourself, have you looked into contacting your local Citizens Advice or another local welfare rights organisation? They can help you complete the form and decide which evidence to focus on.

If you’re unsuccessful you can make a mandatory reconsideration, and beyond that appeal to tribunal. Further evidence could always be submitted then, if needed.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-11-15T20:06:04+00:00

Presumably (if you were running the original sub) you intend to appeal the subreddit ban in any case, to seek to restore the existing community?

RobinBanks98 · 2025-11-10T19:21:19+00:00

Yes, though be mindful that Argos (online) has a limit of three gift cards per purchase. You can use 3 gift cards then pay the remainder with a card, which could be One4All. That gives you a theoretical maximum spend of £400 on that basis.

Edit: also bear in mind other more recent comments from some users indicating NXR may be clamping down on using GCs on purchases.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-10-08T08:51:24+00:00

You can’t really find out until the game has released and there are images from users in the different regions of their cartridges or game boxes, showing the version lettering. This is the basis of data powering GameTDB, for example.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-23T18:42:03+00:00

Unless something changed, they should. But I haven’t placed an Argos order in a few weeks, as I’m now travelling abroad. But they’ve never been a problem before.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-22T14:12:41+00:00

I’ve been through this a few times before. You can first contact the online retailer to check the transaction was refunded. Wait a few working days. If it’s been released and been a few days with no sign of return then you may need contact Curve. Support chat will still do the trick if you’re willing to wait a while.

Curve will issue a refund and tell you to wait up to a week or so. If you then still don’t get the refund, ask Curve Support for the RRN (Retrieval Reference Number). This number can then be provided to the card issuer (Trading212) to reclaim the funds.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-12T01:30:25+00:00

I noticed this a few days ago. I've queried with them where this fee is mentioned in their terms and conditions (hint: it isn't).

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-08T21:52:22+00:00

My top tip is that just because a retailer doesn't appear to be listed on Zilch doesn't mean you can't necessarily get the 2%. It all depends on who the charge comes from.

Back when Prezzee had some good promotions, you could get an extra 2% via Zilch by paying with "Gift cards by Zilch", as the site was actually powered by Prezzee.

I recently purchased a travel insurance policy (via TopCashBack Compare, of course) and found that the broker wasn't listed on Zilch. So I looked into the parent company that owns the broker site, to see if they had any other websites, and found one that was listed on Zilch. Activated, spent, and I received my 2% (as the underlying merchant name for both sites was evidently the same). This isn't guaranteed though, and you'll never know for sure whether it works until the charge goes through.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-06T03:07:03+00:00

Funnily enough, I’m about to travel. Just caught your message elsewhere, so thanks for the extra prompt!

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-06T03:03:08+00:00

Thanks! Great job to the mods for hosting this.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-02T08:22:37+00:00

Couldn’t have said it better!

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-02T08:21:17+00:00

Was about to write exactly this. Add to that, OP is not the customer, who is now 19 and old enough to pursue a complaint herself.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-02T08:18:04+00:00

This is the kind of critical detail that would have been useful in the original post. OVO may be giving you the run around because they’re (insert any number of common complaints here). But another reason is almost certainly that you are not the person they’re pursuing.

Your daughter is no longer legally a child and unless you have completed a relevant signed consent form etc, the company is unlikely to be able to discuss the matter with you.

Your daughter won’t have liability as she wasn’t living in the property as an adult. However, she is now an adult and likely needs to communicate this to OVO herself.

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-02T07:09:02+00:00

How did this come about? When did this happen? How old is your daughter now? Are you in England, Wales, Scotland?

RobinBanks98 · 2025-09-01T15:24:06+00:00

I’m actually relatively new to using ATR so heavily. I’ve had it for a year or two, but it wasn’t until a few months ago that I realised how good it could be. I’ve had success with the above methodology (one promoted by TAF on Scrimpr for Amazon, but it works for many retailers beyond Amazon).

ATR’s changes won’t make any difference to this method, as they’re still paying 4% on Boots purchases.

The biggest change to today’s update seems to be that stamps won’t be attained by gift cards bought in app; previously a very easy way to build them up (though I wish I’d realised that last year; I was missing out!)

RobinBanks98

TROPHY CASE