Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Lolerz Thanks for replying to me, yes I've been ignoring her & will continue to do so. All she keeps saying is they want to come up with an amicable settlement. Keeps saying this to our receptionist she shouldn't be saying this to a receptionist or even me in the first place as they have given no proof of anything no IP addresses noting just keeps saying about an amicable settlement.
    • If a DCA supplies a reconstituted copy of the CCA what would be the next step? It seems that a reconstituted copy must be a " true copy " of the executed agreement, it must contain the Prescribed Terms. But given that there is no copy of the applicants signature surely it could be an agreement form with the details filled in. How can it be assumed that this " copy " represents a true copy that the claimant has supposed to have signed. Cabot have demonstrated a bit of sabre rattling when they say "Until we're able to provide this information , your account is unenforceable. This means we're not permitted to obtain a County Court judgement against you . Whilst we cannot pursue legal action, your balance remains outstanding ". I looked up a case... Cabot UK Ltd  v  Bachellier (2010) which might help, but it's tough reading, I'd prefer to plough through War and Peace. This particular case with Cabot is not huge , approx' £140, but the only other worry that I have is also with Cabot...£2100. They may try to make a point with lesser case.
    • you'll never find a court open on a w/end MB. all courts are closed Good Friday and Bank Holiday Monday. However as Andy points out, that does NOT mean you get 2 extra days to file, you get one, same as xmas/new Year. UKPC have not filed their, so no rush on yours as dave says.  
    • Top US magazine slams Britain after 14 years of Tory ‘psychodrama’ The New Yorker’s excoriating report on the state of the UK lays bare how Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union (EU) “catalysed some of the worst tendencies in British politics”. “The only way to think about it is as a psychodrama enacted, for the most part, by a small group of middle-aged men who went to élite private schools, studied at the University of Oxford, and have been climbing and chucking one another off the ladder of British public life" Top US magazine slams Britain after 14 years of Tory ‘psychodrama’ WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK The New Yorker’s excoriating report on the state of the UK lays bare how Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union (EU) “catalysed...  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 160 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

Problems with Mackenzie Hall


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6243 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

Hi

 

I hope someone can help. Several weeks ago I received a letter from Mackenzie Hall stating they were acting for the Lowell Group and were chasing a debt of £2,421.00p and required payment of same.

 

This debt was from about 10 years ago and was owed to Barclaycard. At that time my marriage broke up and I had to go down the IVA route to manage my debts.

 

The IVA was taken on by an Insolvency Practitioner and after about two years of paying them, they went bankrupt. I can't even remember the name but they were in London.

 

I was advised by their administrators to stop making any further payments and I've heard nothing since. This was over 8 years ago and having moved several times all records are now lost. I am certain though that I have never received a CCJ for this old debt

 

I sent Mackenzie Hall a time barred letter which they have ignored. Today I received a final notice giving me 7 days to pay up or further action will be taken.

 

Any advice would be appreciated as to what to do next.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I am aware, this debt is too old to pursue (over 6 years). They are trying to get you to acknowledge it, so that they can start the ball rolling again. They cannot legally enforce payment after 7 days and are calling your bluff. I am not sure of the implications for yourself in sending the time-barred letter, but am sure that someone else will come along to advise. If you have acknowledged the debt, then you may have re-opened the time frame for them collecting on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would hold tight and see what happens next. Do not contact them any more. If they try and contact you by 'phone, don't confirm anything. They are trying scare tactics to get you to worry about the "further action" they might take and if you get them on the 'phone, they will tell you all kinds of bowlarks to worry you. Ignore it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to satisfy yourself that it is statute barred [if you have been out of touch for a while, a ccj could have been attached] it might be an idea to

get a copy of your credit file.

 

If there has been no movement on the account for the required 6 years

[assuming you are not living in Scotland] then write to your local Trading Standards saying that these people are chasing you for a debt, and ask for

their advice on how to respond as you have already informed them that it is an old debt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite what the goons at MHall might tell you NOTHING will unbar a statute barred debt. Once the six-year time limit has passed nothing will restart the clock - letters, promises of payment, definately nothing verbal.

 

The debt will still exist and you may feel morally obliged to pay. But before you do that think carefully where the money's going. The original debtor has washed his hands of it and claimed it against the tax bill. The original creditor may also have claimed on its bad debt insuarnce policies and will have definately sold it on to a debt buyer so they were not too much out of pocket.

 

Now MHall comes on the scene demanding money and making vague threats which border on demanding money by deception. While the advice to check your credit files is sound you should make MHall prove the existence of any orders agaisnt your name. If they won't (because they can't!) write to them and tell their continued letters constitute harrassment and you will report them to the relevant agencies.

 

Come next April the Financial Services Ombudsman takes over as watchdog. Hopefully he'll be more of a rottweiler to the OFT's poodle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

All has been quiet with MH since my last letter from them offering a reduction in the alleged debt.

 

Today (23/2/07) I received a red letter threatening court action if I do not settle the full debt by 26th Feb.

 

They threaten CCJ, seizure of assets and bankruptcy.

 

I am loathe to communicate with them, but now I want to fight back, by threatening them with Trading Standards, harrasment etc but I don't know how to go about it.

 

I've since moved address and the last letter was forwarded on. I don't really want to let them know where I am

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think moving house makes much difference, Mackenzie Hall posted my husband a red card to our new address and we are not even on the voters role. I presume they find addresses from your credit file. We had a few emails back and forth, we have asked for a copy of the agreement, nothing has arrived, we changed email address so they couldn't bother us, so far we have heard nothing else. My husband's debt is about 12 years old and goes back to his previous marriage, he has never paid anything to them or communicated with them, I paid £10 per month from my bank account for a year or two to the previous DCA's, but have no intention of paying them anything else. As far as I'm concerned because they have had no communication from my husband and no payment from him, its statute barred and until they come up with paperwork etc we will continue to ignore them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They claim to be acting on behalf of Lowell. I assume you've heard nothing from them. If you want to do something send MHall the CCA letter. This will cost a £1 and it is essential to send the letter by recorded delivery. There's a template letter in the sticky section. I think its letter N.

 

This request will force Mhall to produce documentation to prove a) a signed, true copy ofthe credit agreement they allege exists b) they have the right to collect and c) a statement of account.

 

They have 12 working days to comply. Any form of communication which does not provide these details is bullpooooo. Sending you one document and not all three is also bullpoo.

 

If they don't comply within this limit they are in default. If the default continues for another month they have committed a criminal offence (for the umpteenth time but the authorities don't do anything). That will help you because they wouldn't be so stupid as to take legal action and take you to court when they themselves have not complied with the law. Would they?

 

When they default you can safely tell them to get knotted

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...