Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Mercers....


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5074 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

This is fascinating info, PriorityOne. As Mercers also trade as Calder Financial, do you think this applies to them to?

I just did a quick check on them from the information I have on their letters and they don't come up either. At the bottom the small print states.

Registered number:2550639. Registered address: Citypoint, One Ropemaker Street, London, EC2 YSS. Mercers Debt Collections LTD trading as Calder Financial.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to be in about the same position with their alter ego, Calders.

Soooo it looks like an email to the Information Commissioner is in order here. What fun:D . I'm getting onto it right away and thinking of how I can break the news to good old Calders/Mercers/Barclays. yipppeee!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just spoken to the Information Commissioner's helpline and they tell me Mercers is registered. Their number is apparently z5068082.

I'm going to try putting in the number now and see what it says about them.

Apparently the postcode given for the address I have on my Calders letters is not a valid postcode though.

This is a bit odd because I've recently discovered that another DCA, BLS Collections uses a false address on all their correspondence. Royal mail are currently investigating.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're right about the address thing. It's definitely worth pursuing. I also wonder if there are any rules about the addresses given on correspondence having to be accurate. In the case of BLS they have somehow managed to [problem] a fake PO Box as well as a false postcode. The PO Box doesn't exist but but a redirection is in place for their correspondence. This shouldn't be possible but it's been happening for years. I wonder if the one Ropemaker St Address is genuine?....I'll check up on it.

Patma

Link to post
Share on other sites

The address seems to be genuine. I've googled it and come up with other companies in the same building. It must be a pretty large building though because they all have different postcodes. Without going an searching on the ground, we won't know whether Mercers just have an accomodation address there Not much wiser yet. Patma

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for you P1, Well spotted! The postcode is wrong on the Ropemaker Street address too, so maybe having an incorrect address too is significant. I don't understand yet why theses DCAs would deliberately make their address incorrect, but I suspect they have some devious reason. I know for sure that BLS Collections have a totally false address on their correspondence and I am currently involved with complaints about that.

I'm looking forward to hearing what response you get.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...