Mercers....

[gh2008]

P1 you have PM with some more info

 

BTW they (the 3 Directors - all employees of Sharklays) have declared the Company as being dormant since at least 1/1/2006 !

 

gh

[gh2008]

Mercers' Company Secretary and 1 of the Directors is another wholly owned (by the Barclays Group) dormant limited Company Barcosec ltd

[star_scream]

Companies house say that Barcosec ltd is Dormant and yet under business activities it says it is a non trading company.

 

So you can have both?????

[PriorityOne]

Mercers is a limited company.... and therefore, cannot have transactions going through on behalf of anyone else, if I remember rightly. It's the limited that makes the difference.

 

My recent postal order (CCA request) was made payable to Mercers by name (typed), yet appeared as a credit on a recent Barclaycard statement. Curious to know which bank account processed that one for starters.

 

I've replied to your PM, gh.....

[cashins]

I am not sure anyone will ever sort out the web of companies and accounts Barclays have.

 

Companies wise, they have a habit of setting up Ltd companies in advance for whatever use. One series is called Barshelfco and last time I looked at Companies house there were over 80 - 90 listed that have come into being, changed their name, gone dormant, opened up again etc.

 

Account wise, it would not be a problem for them to take a cheque in the name of Mercers. Barclaycard is just a trading style of Barclays plc (not a seperate Ltd company). They could well have adopted Mercers as trading style of Barclays plc (nothing to do with Mercers Ltd). As companies are no longer required to register trading styles at Companies House, you would never know. They then just transfer it internally.

 

P1 Did you put Mercers Ltd on the cheque? If you did, no idea how they got round that.

 

David

[Patma]

I've had a reply to an email query I sent to The IC to confirm what they told me verbally the other day.This is what they said:-

 

"Thank you for your e mail of 25 February 2008.

There is a current notification in the name of Mercers Debt Collection Limited (but not Collections in the plural) with a company registration number of 02550639. The data protection registration number is Z5068082 and it has an expiry date of 20/11/08. Calder Financial is not shown as a trading name.

A data protection notification can only cover one legal entity so each separate limited company would need to notify in its own right if it is not exempt.

Regards

Notification Department"

I've replied and sent them a copy of correspondence I've had from Calders. I don't know what the significance is of Calders not being shown as a trading name though or the fact their name uses the word Collections in the plural rather than Collection which is how they are registered.

This is all soooo complicated I can't get my head round it LOL

[PriorityOne]

**Interesting update**

 

This account was eventually sold by absolute assignment to CL Finance.... because CL Finance sent me a Notice of Assignment to say so before they were told to Foxtrot Oscar....

 

Heard no more until last week, when BARCLAYS write with a copy of a blank "Agreement" which is not an "Agreement" anyway, even if it was signed .... asking me to contact them re. the outstanding balance that's owed to THEM!!

 

Cheeky bergers....

 

No response given and filed away for now....

[gh2008]

Hi P1,

 

There's a discussion on one of the other threads about this. I believe that, in some situations (if not all), they actually only assign the 'future receivables' rather than the actual account.

[PriorityOne]

Hi P1,

 

There's a discussion on one of the other threads about this. I believe that, in some situations (if not all), they actually only assign the 'future receivables' rather than the actual account.

 

OMG... I've heard it all now! Assign the receivables? So they sell the right to collect the account to someone else but keep the deficit on their books? At no point have I ever been told that the assignment was for receivables.... it was quite clear that the account was now owned by CL Finance.... yet Barclays have now written.

 

No Agreement though.... however they want to word things...

[gh2008]

Thinking about this, has anyone ever received an s78 response with the name of the assignee on i.e. the DCA chasing ......

 

An s.78 request *should* be answered with a copy of the agreement. *IF* that agreement (rather than the receivable) has been assigned then the creditor should be shown as the DCA rather than the OC .........

 

hmmm that's got to mean that they would remain in default of the request.... wouldn't it?

[PriorityOne]

In theory yes, but the Agreement would always have the creditors name on it.... so if the new bunch can't produce one and neither can the creditor, it begs the question of whether the assignment was lawful in the first place.

 

In my case, it wasn't lawful; due to unlawful charges at the point of sale.... although no-one has ever produced anything remotely enforceable anyway.... so there were several grounds for telling them to bog off

[rebel11]

Are we not missing the point, the OFT guidelines state that companies have to be honest in their dealings with consumers with regards to debt collection. Mercers is part of Barclaycard. For Mercers to pretend to be a

separate entity is just dishonest. The reason is that Barclaycard can pretend to be whiter then white, don't forget they need to do that so they can sponsor things like the Barclays Prem. Consumers will slag off

Mercers, when all but in name it's Barclays carrying out the harrasment. Barclays can spread there name and con more consumers into debt.

 

Didn't the CEO of Barclays say credit cards were a rip off in 2003.

Edited June 11, 2010 by rebel11

[oilyrag]

YES HE DID!!

 

oilyrag

[charlie*]

It's midday, Thursday, 11th June... (D Day plus 5)

 

I have just been listening to Radio 4....

 

He's back - that fantastic sleuth from 60 years ago...

 

Paul Temple & Steve (his wife)

 

D'you know, he does'nt sound a day older

 

JUST THE CHAP TO TACKLE THIS MERCERS PUZZLE

[PriorityOne]

Mercers are one of many in-house companies that debts get passed to.... it's nothing new. In my experience, the OFT are there to make us feel better but in effect, do very little at all.

 

Mercers were one of the worst for harrassment because of the telephone dialling software.... I knew they had nothing, so it was a case of who would get bored first...

[PriorityOne]

**Interesting update**

 

This account was eventually sold by absolute assignment to CL Finance.... because CL Finance sent me a Notice of Assignment to say so before they were told to Foxtrot Oscar....

 

Heard no more until last week, when BARCLAYS write with a copy of a blank "Agreement" which is not an "Agreement" anyway, even if it was signed .... asking me to contact them re. the outstanding balance that's owed to THEM!!

 

 

Have now had an angry red letter from the Lewis Group two years after telling them to tell their "client" CL Finance to berger off... demanding money with menaces again.

 

Are they assuming I've lost all track of previous correspondence? Not sure whether to dig it out, enclose a copy and tell them to berger off back where they crawled or to ignore it, to be honest.... greedy barstewards!

 

[PriorityOne]

Decided to tell them to berger off.... etc...