Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
    • As already mentioned freely available "credit scores" are fairly useless. All lenders have their own "credit scoring" system, that for obvious reasons they don't divulge. And they're "scored" differently to the freely available ones. As soon as they could, we've always encouraged our two children to use credit cards responsibly... Pay off in full, etc, to generate good history. It's paid off. At quite young ages, they have both obtained loans for cars, mortgage and their credit card limits are through the roof. Personally, I have shifted debt around a lot on credit cards (even financed a house purchase once at 0% 😉) and I've only ever been refused a credit card once, sorry twice by the same company, over many years. They must have something very different in their lending criteria. You're a tight one, Mr Branson.
  • 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

Cabot/Mackenzie Hall?? - SCOTLAND


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4697 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 Everyone,

 

Just after a wee bit of advice regarding a letter I received the other day from Mackenzie Hall, it said they had been provided my address as being the possible residential details for the person they are looking for (my name) and they wanted to contact me regarding a 'personal matter', get in touch quoting Ref blah blah blah...... I have ignored it, obvs LOL!

 

Now, on the letter I noticed an email address at the top - cabot @ mackenziehall. I checked my Equifax credit report and there is a default registered by cabot for a Credit Card, start date 19/01/2005, default date 08/08/2005, no other details or payment history. I cant think what this is, I did get into financial trouble years ago when i was a student and was silly, i had a credit card with capital one but i dealt with aktiv kapital and this has been settled, letter confirming this is filed and credit report shows settled. I'm thinking it may be an old storecard, although I still have a Dorothy Perkins one and this old one was a Burtons one (:???:) so surely they would know me?

 

If the start date of this Cabot on my credit report is Jan 2005, then I'm thinking the orginial creditor file will have dropped off as its 6 years. Are Cabot allowed to put seperate defaults on my credt file?

 

As I live in Scotland, am i correct in saying that this is now Statute Barred? I have never heard from Cabot, havent written any letters to anyone and havent paid since well before January 2005.

 

Also, on checking my Credit Report mackenzie hall have entered 2 searches on table one, the reason being 'outstanding debt' - am i right in thinking they arent allowed to do this?

 

thanks for answering my questions, sorry my post was so long!! :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Statute Barred time is 5 years for Scotland.

 

Muck Hall and Cabot have been busily buying up near time barred accounts so they might just have boobed with this one.. IF.. it does actually belong to you.

 

I will amend your thread title to include your location and hopefully someone will be able to advise you further.

 

Meanwhile, please do not telephone Muck Hall/Cabot :)

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

What an unholy alliance eh Crapbot/Muck Hall:puke:

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankies!!

 

Dont worry, I have no intention of calling them! Before I found this site I made the mistake of calling fredrickson and was reduced to tears! LOL! Never again!

 

They havent stated what the letter is in regards to, which I believe they have been pulled up on before? I'm busily reading through all the threads on these 'people' and its just shocking what they have been allowed to get away with!

 

This site is a godsend cause if i didnt know about SB and all that I would have been in a total panick and would've been straight on the phone! I guess thats waht they rely on!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the letter that states if your not the person they are looking for, you should contact their investigations team. (I have this one in stock)

If it is I would suggest that you forward it to Trading standards as they are already aware of this one.

 

On the other hand if it is an old debt of yours you could also send them the Statute Barred letter (Scottish version)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that is the letter I have, no details of anything else.

 

I'm just going to ignore it as they havent stated what it is about, but if i get any other letters (I have a feeling....) then statute Barred letter it is!

 

I'm still going to report the letter to trading standards as they arent supposed to send out letters like that are they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It 's typical trying to get ordinary punters to do their dirty work:-x

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

As was stated earlier, Mackenzie Hall in particular buy large amounts of Statute Barred Debt and then they are forced to go fishing to find out where the person lives.

However, if you respond to these letters then they will ask for your personal details. Threfore, the question is. who the hell do they think they are ?

 

Remember, the onus is on the pursuer to prove that the debt exists and not the recipient to prove otherwise.

 

In addition, if your not the person named on the envelope you would not open the mail, WOULD YOU ?

Edited by Crocdoc
Add sentence
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...