Forrester UK Holdings LLC Help Needed

[Gary Stevens]

I hired a Hypercom Credit Card Terminal from Credit Card Processing Solutions who used Forrester UK Holdings, the agreement was for four years but it did state that you can in the first 18 months be released from the contract providing you pay 6 months rental. Since my business came to and end I have nothing but hassle from this company stating the information I have is not correct. Forrester are based in New York and not in the UK they have sent me two conflicting letters telling me where to return the machine but when I rang the one company (Who I did set it up with) CPS Card Processing Solutions, they stated that they do not normally take the machines even though a letter from Forrester stated I returned the machine to CPS. On the INTERNET there are horror stories about them claiming all kinds of things from its ex customers such as denying they have received the equipment back and getting UK debt collection agents to chase payments that they are clearly not owed. Does anyone have any advice to give. Clearly I will return the machine to CPS via signed for recorded process. My concern is the hassle I am getting from Forrester themselves even now. The fact they have told me to send it back to CPS appears to be wrong also. I have faxed, wrote and explained and I have even had conversations with the call centre people in New York who just do not understand the UK law or procedures. Each time they ring me they insist I fax the same documentation over then a week later it all starts again by someone else who takes up the case. How can I make the matter stop?

 

[Anon Amus]

The company, Forrester UK Holdings LLC and now First Collect International, (on their behalf), have been chasing me for a debt that does not exist for over a year now. The amount is a measly £190, or 'Final Settlement' of 'JUST' £63. They never answer the phone, don't open their post and they certainly don't have any email address's or regular contact names. In plain terms it is a scam, we have been sold out by Hypercom who sold on the leases for the Cardnet terminals reccomended by Lloyds TSB. Interestingly, Lloyds no longer recommend this criminal outfit.

Just take a look at the google search results to know that we are not alone: Google: UK Forrester Holdings for the best results and you'll see what i mean.

Should it go to court i am confident it will be laughed out of the building. They operate a policy of no-contact so you will have to tell them exactly how far you are willing to take it and, by recorded post too, to prove it even got there. I would rather die than pay these criminals.

I have today sent them both this letter as i have now reported them to the FSA, I will also take the matter up with both my MP and the Press should they continue to harass me:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not going to waste my time on either First Collect International or Forrester UK Holdings LLC any longer. You only have to look at the dates of the enclosed letters to deduce that neither ‘Company’ knows what they are doing. At least if you are going to operate a scam together, do it properly. What you are attempting, knowingly outside of UK regulations, won’t work on me.

I have today registered a detailed complaint with the Financial Services Authority and also agreed to talk to the media, (about both companies)). I should warn you both now to choose your fights more carefully. I am good with a pen, I have all the time in the world and my partner is a Solicitor in a very large London firm. In effect I have a free Legal Team, do you? I am also today sending the Financial Services Authority further details of our correspondence along with a colourful selection of other people’s complaints.

I should make you aware that I am now considering a case against you. I have suffered considerable stress because of your continued harassment. Stress that I can prove I have suffered, in court, and with GP letters/documentation. If you think all the costs you have already incurred, the postage costs, the man hours, (not to mention the possible legal fees), are somehow finally going to be worth the measly £62.96 “settlement fee”, (fees you have been trying to extort from me for over a year now), you couldn’t have been more wrong.

I have now moved from my former address and so will now, thankfully, not even receive your ridiculous letters. My temporary telephone number you somehow procured goes dead in three days. As far as I am concerned, that is the end of it. You too would be wise to consider this matter closed. It is now in the hands of the FSA, and should you want it, the press.

 

[djw766]

We find ourselves in a very similar sitaution. Took out a card terminal through LLoyds with the provider it transpires being Forrester (Hypercom?). Things didn't work out as we wanted and the terminal lay redundant for a VERY long time. We were tied into a 4 year contract and rentals were made. Eventually we cancelled the contract and returned the equipment.
Then, over 12 months after that, from nowhere, we receive a letter from FCI demanding a payment of over £700 for an alleged outstanding balance. We advised them by phone and letter that the terminal had been returned. FCI continue with letters making demands and they always seem to be posted 2nd class and seem to be postmarked 2 days after the date of the letter itself giving you no time to keep to the time frame they lay down! They now advise us that they are commencing proceedings against us. This is stress we simply do not need and it seems incomprehensible that they can write to someone demanding money without providing any proof or brekdown of the amount. From what we remember the rental was around £25 per month with a £75 additional payment per quarter. As we say the contract was cancelled and the terminal was returned over 12 months ago so where does £700 come from anyway?

 

[cvgreg]

guys

i have just seen these postings and the same letter was sent to my brothers company... but i will be calling their bluff and write to them from my firm to advise we can accept service on my brothers company's behalf ....
this way il make money from them....
greg

 

[framerman]

Like many posts I have read I have become a victim of Forrester Holdings having paid the last couple of lease payments and returned the machine on my retirement. They have worked true to form and want proof of the old machine's return and now demand £500 as they say it has not been! Today we have received the letters threatening debt collectors, court action etc. I have given my solicitor all the detail I can and will be entertained to see how she deals with a firm who cannot be dealt with directly. I would be pleased to hear of anyone who has more recent experience of Forrester and the outcome of their actions through a solicitor.

 

[Broadcaster]

We too are being chased by Forrester who tell us they will continue to pursue the 'outstanding debt'. After being in contract with Forrester for 4 years we received a call from them offering a new 'compliant' machine and a new contract. We declined, partly because we had become aware of the reputation of this outfit and partly because we knew the machine would soon become surplus to our requirements.
We told the caller that we would be happy to keep the machine a little longer, but on the basis that we could cancel as soon as we were ready and that was agreed to. In April 2012 we wrote to Forrester terminating the contract and asking for an address to where the machine should be returned. A further direct debit was taken from our account a few days later but we had no response to our letter, or details of return address until four months later, by which time we were told a further payment was due. We declined to make this further payment and returned the machine to the address given and obtained a signed delivery receipt.
Since then I have received rude and aggressive phone calls from Forrester, but will not bow to their pressure. If they, or their 'debt collectors' want to take us to Court, I welcome it. We will claim all expenses in defending the matter. Taking into Court all of the online comments regarding this bunch of cowboys will certainly assist our defence.

 

[framerman]

I am sorry to read that you have become a victim of Forrester Holdings and I can only cheer you up by saying they are persistent. It is a year since I retired, returned the machine and paid what was asked. Whilst they have stopped pursuing me for £500 for the machine "which they never received" they still send letters saying that they cannot get payment from my account so, in essence, pay up or else. My solicitor has written to the address in the UK (which is simply that of their courier) and has faxed messages a number of times, all of which have gone unacknowledged.
My solicitor has reached the end of all the possibilities and advised me months ago to return all mail to the sender. The new owner of my business has told them, any number of times, that she has nothing to do with them but they persist. On one of the forums I recall another victim found their New York address andI wonder if that did them any good!
Good luck!

 

[nickelandrea]

Blooming company!
I'm having trouble too.

I've spoken to their call centre a few times, been assured the account is closed, and I have sent back their terminal - recorded signed for, so I know they received it.
I just received a demand for payment today. (I had to cancel the direct debit because they kept taking the monthly fee and didn't take the termination fee as they said they would)

They really are sharks.

 

[nickelandrea]

Oh, it gets worse and worse and worse!

I have just been on the phone to them - they are chasing up the payments I'm not making.
the guy said (Carl he said his name was), that the letter they sent me "clearly" stated that I had to pay a "restocking fee" of £95 if I terminated the agreement within my 4 year period, and that I still had to pay the rental fee until the end of the 4 year period.

basically, I am supposed to interpret the phrase "any rentals outstanding" as "you still have to pay the rental fee even though you've sent back the machine and you've ended the contract"
how does that translate in the real world?

to me, "any outstanding rentals" means "any money you owe us from when the machine was in your possession"
and that's what the original guy I spoke to said - he told me that once I'd sent back the terminal, all I owed was the £95, which HE CALLED the termination fee!
I don't understand how they think this can be legal. Surely the whole point of paying an extra £95 is to "make up for" any income they might lose from not having your rental payments, and that's why you pay it. Otherwise why would anyone send back the equipment before the lease end date? I've got to pay the company a fee to cancel a contract and still pay them a monthly rental.
I can't get my head round it.
Who would agree to that??

I'm so mad!

 

[kulture]

This highlights why any business should read AND UNDERSTAND contracts before signing them. When you have a 48 month contract with a monthly charge of say £10, then they expect to get £480. They will justify this saying that they have a number of up front costs and these are split evenly over the full period. If you terminate early their up front costs have not gone away and so they want their £480.

Thus when they say "any rentals outstanding" they mean any rentals outstanding from the 48 you agreed to pay.

I am not saying that they are right. I certainly do not like these companies that require silly long notice periods and will roll you onto a new long contract if you miss the deadline. That said if you signed a contract saying that you will pay £x a month for 4 years, please do not be surprised when they expect you to stick to it.

 

[nickelandrea]

But I just spoke to a solicitor on the phone who agreed with me that he would interpret outstanding rentals meaning anything that was owed until the equipment was returned.
He also said that the letter was ambiguous and that was naughty (he didn't say naughty, but I can't remember the exact wording he used)

Interestingly, he added that normal consumers get protection legally that a judge would say in a court "i don't understand the contract wording so I can't expect a normal person to understand it either" and rule in the consumer's favour.
Suddenly, by becoming a Sole Trader, I am now more intelligent than a Circuit Judge and therefore must be able to interpret any jargon/mumbo jumbo that is shown to me.
I can't believe that Sole Traders, because we are counted as businesses should now be forced to understand stuff that we weren't expected to understand before the business was opened.
I haven't been back to university since I opened my shop, I haven't gained a law degree and I haven't passed the bar. How am I supposed to have gained this extra knowledge or ability?
I can't afford to have a solicitor go over all my smallprints every time I sign a service agreement - I'm having trouble paying my rent quarterly, so where I'm supposed to find this extra money from, I don't know!

The worst thing about this whole sorry mess is that I didn't even have a choice about signing the contract with FUKH in the first place - my contract was with CPS, who used Elavon as the service provider and FUKH as the machine supplier.
If I were a consumer, my argument would be with CPS, and they would be the ones who had to sort it out. If I'd had a choice, I would have researched FUKH and not gone with them in the first place.
I can't even remember getting a separate service agreement for Elavon and FUKH. It was 4 years ago! I could swear that my only contract and service agreement was headed CPS.

 

[nickelandrea]

got carried away there!

The solicitor I spoke to also said "well what on earth is the £95 for?" He said I could expect reasonably to pay 80-90% of the rest of the term, and that with 7 months to go, he could see the reason behind £95 being the termination fee, but he couldn't understand why they would charge that if they didn't also stop the rest of the rental fees.

 

[BusyBusy]

When did you sign your contract? Was it after May 2011? You might want to investigate whether they have a licence to offer credit..

 

[nickelandrea]

it was 3½ years ago - so before May 2011.

would the bit about credit only count after May 2011?

 

[Mcbroon]

Forrester are a bunch of nasty people hassling unsuspecting business people in the UK. They are particularly nasty because they made a fatal error when setting up their UK business. They forgot about having a consumer credit license. So now they are taking it out on us.

BusyBusy above is 100% correct. To rent these machines the company must have a consumer credit license you can check this at the website of the OFT.

For our own personal situation we checked with the OFT and the Ombudsman who both confirmed that at the time of our contract with Forrester, Forrester did not have a Consumer Credit Licence so the only way they could try and get payment from us was through the courts - which they won't do as they know they would lose. - Spread the News

 

[ConceptAberdeen]

I am currently about to embark in getting out the Contract with Forrester. I have been with them over the 4 year period, but have been told they are a nigtmare to get away from.
Can you supply some basic advice on getting away without all the hassles please if we can.

 

[Mcbroon]

Hi - you need to check when your contract was started with Forrester. If they did not have a consumer credit licence at that time the only way they can try and get the outstanding rental from you is through the courts which they would lose as they had no licence. (You can check this with the OFT). The re-stocking charge we just paid by cheque. As for the hassle - they have been phoning us regularly and are unpleasant and threatening. I just put them on hold and occasionally check back to see if they like the music. Make sure you have a careful note of the return of the machine (including photo's of your package), and make sure you cancel your direct debit. Good luck!

 

[Gadfly]

If the company did not have a credit licence then the agreement would be invalid and it would be reasonable to expect Direct Debits to be refunded under the DD Guarantee. Has anyone tried this?

 

[GraemeL]

@Gadfly - please read dates on posts