fbpx

Age Verification

ARE YOU 18+ OR OLDER?

This website requires you to be 18+ years of age or older. Please verify your age to view the content, or click “Exit” to leave.

Exit

EXCLUSIVE: Viewble Media stores urged to check credit reports for CCJs

A number of stores received CCJs after failing to respond to a court summons they claimed not to have had notice of

viewble media

Convenience store owners that took out digital media screen agreements with Viewble Media have been urged to check their credit report for county court judgements (CCJs).

The advertising firm collapsed last year, leaving hundreds of stores including NFRN members paying leasing firms tens of thousands of pounds for services they were no longer receiving. One investor report described the actions of Viewble Media as a “Ponzi scheme”.

Grenke acted as one of the major finance providers and continues to pursue retailers for repayment through the courts. Additional consumer protections for sole traders means most of Grenke’s legal efforts have been targeted at convenience stores set up as limited companies.

Grenke accused of enabling media screen ‘Ponzi scheme’ in local shops

A number of these stores discovered they had received CCJs after failing to respond to court summons they claimed not to have received.

One retailer affected who is helping to organise other victims warned: “There are shop owners out there with their heads in the sand. We’re aware of about 40 incorporated businesses being sued. There must be more out there.”

In November, judges at Reading County Court ordered Grenke to file a list of all similar cases they are undertaking after they spotted a number of small businesses had claimed they were mis-sold the Grenke contracts. The court order read: “There may be other defended claims brought by this claimant where defendants have raised similar allegations.”

Retailers keep media screens as compensation for missing payments

The judge will then consider whether to group together the individual hearings. “The more we have on our list, the better it has to be for the defence case in court,” said the retailer.

Asked to comment, a Grenke spokesperson confirmed the company had “complied with the court order requiring the filing of a list of cases”, but refused to say when asked how many cases it included. The claims related to improper selling are strenuously denied by Grenke.

Comments

This article doesn't have any comments yet, be the first!

Become a member to have your say