Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Mackenzie Hall / Welcome Finance


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6418 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Had a letter off them demanding £1400+ for a alleged Welcome finance loan – I’m not saying I have never had a loan with WF (thought a few years ago I got in such a state I would have taken money off anyone…wish I knew then what I do now!)

Anyway IF I do owe WF anything I have had no correspondence off them and the Mackenzie Hall letter states that WF have made numerous attempts to collect the debt (non of which I have seen), also I have never borrowed anything in that figure…either much lower (say £500) or much higher (£3000+) so I’m guessing the figure is charges and interest etc etc.

With this in mind I have sent the CCA request + £1 on the 22nd August – the cheque was chased yesterday so just waiting to see their response!

Does anyone who has encountered Mackenzie Hall know what they are like with response times etc? - I know they have 12/30days but in my experience DCA don’t like keeping to them!

Will keep you posted.

People who haven't made mistakes, haven't made anything!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been argued in these threads and on other forums that a CCA request should not be sent to the collector but to the company that owns the debt, in this case it would appear to be Welcome. Having said that Mackenzie Hall have cashed your cheque so they appear to be taking responsibility for this matter.

 

Mackenzie Hall have an aversion to responding to letters demanding information you are legally entitled to. I would set your calendar to the 12 working day rule in which time they must provide you with the CCA details you have asked for and the 30 calendar days after which they default on your request - technically committing a criminal offence but the OFT are useless and will do nothing about it.

 

That isn't to say that you should not report Mackenzie Hall to the OFT, your local trading standards department and the East Ayrshire trading standards about their behaviour.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been argued in these threads and on other forums that a CCA request should not be sent to the collector but to the company that owns the debt, in this case it would appear to be Welcome. Having said that Mackenzie Hall have cashed your cheque so they appear to be taking responsibility for this matter.

 

i'm going along the theory that the debt is sold then so is the responsibility - after all isnt that the point in selling it? - i dont think this is a debt to do with me tbh, however i'll wait and see what MH come back with - it maybe i have to chase Welcome afterall - will keep this post updated as and when i hear anything.

People who haven't made mistakes, haven't made anything!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letters normally sent by Mackenzie Hall are "on behalf of clients" and they act simply as collectors. This less than reputable company have yet to officially take over as debt buyers - they have created a company called Acquire Debt and the belief is that they make start buying debts as well as collecting them.

 

If you owe Welcome Finance then they are the owners of the debt and they would have the information you require. You may have to CCA them if you want to get to the bottom of this. Having said that I still believe that if Mackenzie Hall have cashed your cheque they should send you the details. If they don't, and they later say they can't, ask for your money back! Sue them in the county court for it and see where that leads!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Well Makenzie cashed my cheque ages ago - 12 days was up on the 3ed of Sept...rolll on the 3ed of October when i can report them - having said that there is a deafult been added to my account by a Hillesmen Securities today?

 

The figures are the same but i have never heard of them or had anything off them!

 

think i will have to write to the CRA and see who they are!

People who haven't made mistakes, haven't made anything!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to find out more information about this new default. A default cannot be re-registered. It is lodged once, has a life of six years on your crf and then automatically drops off. Find out what it is and if it is related to the matter you have raised with MH get it removed. Tell them it is defamatory and you will sue for libel. This will cost money but there have been instances reported recently of banks paying out cash sums after defaults etc were wrongly registered.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a similar issue with Mackenzie Hall "acting" on behalf of Cabot Finance, I have hounded them by sending follow up faxes everyweek requesting the data, they have got so p'ssd off with me now, they have given the debt back to Cabot to deal with, so no more Mackenzie Hall for me.... just need to kill of Cabot now.:-x

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/25238-barclaycard-cabot-mackenzie-hall.html

 

Mackenzie Hall don't have a leg to stand on, don't awknowledge the debt and dont pay them a penny.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
I have a similar issue with Mackenzie Hall "acting" on behalf of Cabot Finance, I have hounded them by sending follow up faxes everyweek requesting the data, they have got so p'ssd off with me now, they have given the debt back to Cabot to deal with, so no more Mackenzie Hall for me.... just need to kill of Cabot now.:-x

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/25238-barclaycard-cabot-mackenzie-hall.html

 

Mackenzie Hall don't have a leg to stand on, don't awknowledge the debt and dont pay them a penny.....

 

Throughly agree with you there.One question that comes to mind is that if the banks are using DCA's or selling debts for a fraction of the value then why not wipe the losses off the person's account.Am I missing the plot here or is this some tax [problem].Perhaps HMRC should start investigating the banks and DCA's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...