Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
  • 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
      • 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

Mercers Debt Collection


Donel261
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3779 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

If anyone is getting calls from 08701242495 then it is Mercers Debt Collection Agency working on behalf of Barclaycard.

 

I would ignore the calls if I were you, it an automated dial up and my mother receives up to 30 calls a day from them, we are beyond angry now, we just cancel the call, or if we are in the mood have some fun with them, they don't want to waste time messing around with you if you wont put the person they want on so they must have some hefty targets to hit. poor things!!

 

I have sent off the relevant letters asking them to stop and they have ignored, so no point speaking to them. Mind you, if you ignore them they may sell on the debt to Cabot, they are even worse!! :|

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 509
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

A few ways around

 

1. caller reject available from bt/telewest you can stop upto 10 numbers from phoning you. costs approx £2.00 per month.

 

2. annonymous call reject available from bt/telewest. £2.00 per month stops people who have witheld their numbers from getting through. they recieve a recorded message.

 

put one of these services on and they will really p off these sorts of people. mercers are incidently barclays bank themselves.

CLICK HERE FOR A LOOK AT ALL OF MY FILES: http://s134.photobucket.com/albums/q82/bailiffchaser/

do not forget to click on my scale if i am giving you the right advice or advice is making sense click my scales otherwise others think i am not helping you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator
I have just read somewhere that Mercers are registered as non-trading at Companies House... worth checking out seeing as they are trying to get money out of you. Receiving payments = trading. :)

 

They are non-trading and dormant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My mum had a phone call from Mercers at the weekend regarding her overdue barclay card payments.

 

They told her if she didn't make a payment there and then the debt collectors would be round to her house and / or place of work.

 

Needless to say this put the frightners on her and she paid an amount she could not afford.

 

I want to write a letter for her to send about threatening phone calls as i'm sure they are not allowed to do this.

 

Anyone know of a good place to start?

for FAQs & Step By Step

click here

for Templates Library

click here

for Court Bundle

click here

________________

 

WON 121o121 'vs' LloydsTSB

here

WON 121o121 'vs' Halifax C C

here

WON 121o121 'vs' Cahoot CC

here

WON 121o121 'vs' LloydsTSB (again)

here

 

________________

Link to post
Share on other sites

My mum had a phone call from Mercers at the weekend regarding her overdue barclay card payments.

 

They told her if she didn't make a payment there and then the debt collectors would be round to her house and / or place of work.

 

Needless to say this put the frightners on her and she paid an amount she could not afford.

 

I want to write a letter for her to send about threatening phone calls as i'm sure they are not allowed to do this.

 

Anyone know of a good place to start?

 

There is a letter in Bank Templates - Harrassment by Telephone... scroll down and you will find it. There is also a bit you can add to it re. harrassment by doorstep visits......

 

Please note that I am only prepared to communicate with you in writing. Should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please remember that there is only an implied license under English Common Law for certain people to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.).

 

Please therefore take note that, I revoke license under English Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so without my permission, you will then be liable to damages for a tort of trespass. You would also be conspiring in a trespass if you sent someone to visit me nevertheless.

 

Should it be necessary, I will obtain an injunction.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

great stuff, thanks Priorityone.

 

also added a bit about OFFCOM & OFT.

for FAQs & Step By Step

click here

for Templates Library

click here

for Court Bundle

click here

________________

 

WON 121o121 'vs' LloydsTSB

here

WON 121o121 'vs' Halifax C C

here

WON 121o121 'vs' Cahoot CC

here

WON 121o121 'vs' LloydsTSB (again)

here

 

________________

Link to post
Share on other sites

have just read somewhere that Mercers are registered as non-trading at Companies House... worth checking out seeing as they are trying to get money out of you. Receiving payments = trading. :-)

 

If this is true, could you say you will only pay Barclaycard as they are no longer trading?

for FAQs & Step By Step

click here

for Templates Library

click here

for Court Bundle

click here

________________

 

WON 121o121 'vs' LloydsTSB

here

WON 121o121 'vs' Halifax C C

here

WON 121o121 'vs' Cahoot CC

here

WON 121o121 'vs' LloydsTSB (again)

here

 

________________

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I too have received numerous phone calls from Mercer's. I wrote a letter of complaint to the company and also to Barclaycard. Mercer's denied ever receiving the letter, but admitted receiving my Income and Expenditure form, ( which by the way was with the letter of complaint)

Barclaycard wrote back to me and said that i couldn't call it Harassment, even though the man i spoke to from Mercer's was very absusive, and kept ringing a few times in concession. I'm afraid i did use a choice word in the end, especially after quoting to him the harassment act.

 

I now dont answer their calls, and just continue to pay them every month.

All i can say is dont let them get to you, the worse that can happen if for you to receive a CCJ, but at least that way the Judge can see that you have been trying to pay, and hopefully will stop the interest and charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, So here's MY problem with Mercer's.

 

for the past couple of weeks, they've been phoning my house, and asking for my ex-wife. She's NEVER lived at this address, and NEVER will! I don't know how they got MY number, as it's never been connected to her in any way, and it's ex-directory.:mad:

 

So, the other day I replied to one of the messages they left, and told their operator the situation. She was full of apologies, and said she'd remove my number from 'the system'. I gave her the Ex's current address and phone number at the same time.

 

LATER THAT DAY..... they rang for her again! Somewhat annoyed, I went through the whole story a second time. Again I was promised it would be sorted.:mad: :mad:

 

Guess who rang at 8.15 this morning....?:-x :-x :-x

 

 

So the question is, how can I make sure they've got the right data, and can I find out where they got my number from? The first girl I spoke to seemed to imply that it had come from the ex herself... NAUGHTY!

 

I need to send something in writing to Mercers, but what action can I take against them? Someone's not complying with the Data Protection Act, but will they tell me where the number came from?

 

Any advice appreciated.

 

 

D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a solution where Mercer's are concerned. I have wrote to the company asking them to stop phoning me, just to correspond in writting. I have wrote to Barclaycard who passed my debt over to Mercer's, and have made a formal complaint in writting.

 

Mercer's are still phoning, Barclaycard doesn't accept what Mercer's are doing is harassment, even though i have had abuse off one gentleman, and even phoning me twice within a matter of minutes.

 

While i accept that i owe the debt, and are paying Mercer's every month, the only solution i have found is not to answer the phone at all now.

 

Dont know if anyone else can think of a solution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest The Terminator

It may be worth pointing out to Barclayshark that they are also responsible for the conduct of the DCA their using and that you will report both of them to the OFT and trading standards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for your reply. I have already pointed out to Barclaycard and Mercer's that they will face criminal proceedings under' Section 2 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997', and also threatened them with the OFT. But the two letters i have had back from Barclaycard point out that Mercer's are within their rights to keep phoning me, even though i know they are not, especially as i have asked them not to phone verbally, and in writting.

 

Mercer's have denied ever receiving my letter of complaint, but admitted receiving my 'Income and Expenditure Form', which by the way was with the letter of complaint.

So what proof do i need to report Mercer's to the OFT?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep getting these phone calls, have read your replies and it seems these are from Barclaycard?? I havent got a Barclaycard and no one in my family has, any idea on what sort of call this could be please?

 

I rang them back once and it said something like 'G Money and personal Finance' who I dont know either, it wouldnt let me talk to anyone it was a recorded message requesting that I reply to one of their letters?????????

 

which I havent had either?????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody should get caller display on their phones, then bar withheld numbers. Its bound to pee these people off bigstle especially their autdiallers. We could then set up a thread listing ex directory numbers that the parasites use when we dont accept withheld calls. ITS YOUR PHONE YOU CAN DECIDE WHO TO ANSWER AND WHO NOT TO ANSWER Why should we have to put up with some jumped up bully-boy from a call centre. It also pees them off when you lift the phone and dont speak to them (And it costs them money).

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are asking you to respond to a letter then they are chasing you for some debt. Ignore them, and get a copy of your credit reports from Experian and Equifax (£2 each) you can order online and they will post them out to you DONT buy the expensive versions advertised on the website... anyway, when you get them see what debts you have listedand it will give you an idea as to what they want....

 

Experian WiseConsumer

 

https://www.econsumer.equifax.co.uk/consumer/uk/gb_consumerletter.ehtml

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody should get caller display on their phones, then bar withheld numbers. Its bound to pee these people off bigstle especially their autdiallers. We could then set up a thread listing ex directory numbers that the parasites use when we dont accept withheld calls. ITS YOUR PHONE YOU CAN DECIDE WHO TO ANSWER AND WHO NOT TO ANSWER Why should we have to put up with some jumped up bully-boy from a call centre. It also pees them off when you lift the phone and dont speak to them (And it costs them money).

 

One thing I like doing is answering the phone, they ask for who they want, I say yes, Ill get her/him, then throwing the phone on the sofa/in front of speakers etc whilst playing a rather loud classical track or similar/enjoying the rest of the film/programme I am watching.

 

Found out the people (G Money & trinity personal finance 08701242495) who were ringing me werent on behalf of barclays but for time retail finance about a very small charge that I had left on the account not realising before I ceased the direct debit. :roll:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just spoke to companies house and explained to them about Mercers etc... They checked and said that they have filed accounts in the past but have now ceased trading and if you have any info then email it to them and they will investigate it.

 

link on Dormant Companies.

About Us - Guidance

 

 

Reading through this looks a bit complicated .....Anyone see if Ba***card is using this as some sort of Loophole!!

 

Other info:

They changed their name --Previous Names:

Date of changePrevious Name10/07/1991

BARSHELFCO (NO.49) LIMITED ----- To: MERCERS

 

Looking into Barclays one of their subisidiaries is

BARSHELFCO (NO.61) LIMITED and if you do a search for Barshelfco Barclays name always comes up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just spoke to companies house and explained to them about Mercers etc... They checked and said that they have filed accounts in the past but have now ceased trading and if you have any info then email it to them and they will investigate it.

 

link on Dormant Companies.

About Us - Guidance

 

 

Reading through this looks a bit complicated .....Anyone see if Ba***card is using this as some sort of Loophole!!

 

Other info:

They changed their name --Previous Names:

Date of changePrevious Name10/07/1991

BARSHELFCO (NO.49) LIMITED ----- To: MERCERS

 

Looking into Barclays one of their subisidiaries is

BARSHELFCO (NO.61) LIMITED and if you do a search for Barshelfco Barclays name always comes up.

 

we did some searching generally on barshelfco

 

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

 

Approved Lending Institutions - Communities and Local Government

Approved Lending Institutions

 

Section 156 of the Housing Act 1985 enables lenders to secure the first charge on a property ahead of the landlord. Under statute, high street banks or building societies automatically get the first charge. Other organisations must apply to the Secretary of State for Approved Lending Institution status.

List of Approved Lending Institutions

 

Name given on order under s156

 

 

Barshelfco (No.16) Limited

Barshelfco (No.39) Limited

Barshelfco (No.40) Limited

Barshelfco (No.41) Limited

Barshelfco (No.68) Limited

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

barshelf co (no.73) was a joint it venture with xansa in 2002 abou "it"

 

put barshelfco into google and turn the handle see what happens x

:cool: sunbathing in juan les pins de temps en temps

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Found this as Proof that Mercers are Barclays!

 

 

This exhibit contains a list of subsidiaries of Barclays PLC and Barclays Bank

PLC and their jurisdiction of incorporation. This list is not complete. Any

subsidiaries not included in the list would not, in the aggregate, constitute a

"significant subsidiary" as defined in Rule 1-02(w) of Regulation S-X as of

December 31, 2004

 

BARCLAYS BANK PLC /ENG/ Annual and Transition Report (foreign private issuer) (20-F) EXHIBIT 8.1

 

And this is what is found:

 

Jurisdiction Company

 

 

United Kingdom Mercantile Leasing Company (No.132) Limited

United Kingdom Mercantile Leasing Company (No.135) Limited

United Kingdom Mercantile Leasing Company (No.138) Limited

United Kingdom Mercantile Leasing Company (No.141) Limited

United Kingdom Mercantile Leasing Company (No.144) Limited

United Kingdom Mercantile Leasing Company (No.147) Limited

United Kingdom Mercantile Leasing Company (No.150) Limited

United Kingdom Mercantile Leasing Company (No.153) Limited

United Kingdom Mercers Debt Collections Limited

United Kingdom Mervest (Chislehurst) Limited

United Kingdom Mervest (Maidenhead) Limited

United Kingdom Mervest (Sloane) Limited

 

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...