Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes, Hotpoint UK has been a subsidiary of Whirlpool for over 20 years. And unlike some domestic goods manufacturers you can buy from them direct and I believe they employ their own service engineers, Is that your situation? You bought direct from Hotpoint and Hotpoint sent out their own engineer?
    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss.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
  • 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

Mackenzie Hall Chasing SB debt!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5265 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

Just before Christmas I received a letter from Pinnock Solicitors chasing an outstanding from Intelligent Finance.

 

I wrote to them stating the debt was statute barred and never heard a thing back from them.

 

About 2 months ago, I then received these letters from MH chasing the same debt. I wrote back to them stating I didnt know anything about the debts and left it at that.

 

A few weeks later I received a letter asking for me to call their offices to discuss the debts mmm I think NOT! I wrote back saying everything to be done in writing blah blah blah.

 

Anyway a few weeks after this I then receive further chaser letters from MH reducing the debt somewhat saying this is their final offer and enclosing a standing order mandate!

 

I mean do they really think I am that stupid! :p

 

So now what do I do? They are clearly taking no notice of the "do not acknowledge letters" that I previously sent to them - shall I just send these to them again?

 

Thanks LL

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OFT have them under sanctions for chasing SBd accounts. Report their sorry butts :D

 

You should really send MH a SB letter if you haven't already. Use the one you sent the other lot and state that you are reporting them all for trying to collect on an SBd account when you already stated that it's SBd and you're NOT going to pay it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OFT have them under sanctions for chasing SBd accounts. Report their sorry butts :D

 

You should really send MH a SB letter if you haven't already. Use the one you sent the other lot and state that you are reporting them all for trying to collect on an SBd account when you already stated that it's SBd and you're NOT going to pay it!

 

 

Thanks... think I might just do that...... has anyone got the OFT addy please and I will get on the case with that as well :p:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

This debt has now been passed to their partners in crime MERITFORCE.

 

Had the relevant letters sent to me despite telling Muck Hall that I have no memory of these debts :p and that they are SB anyway, but no they carried onto ignore my letters, even wrote to me asking me to give them a call to discuss - I don't think so! Any hooooo, got the letters from MF threatening me with doorstep collection if I didnt ring or pay up!

 

I rang them last night, told them I was fed up with receiving threatening DCA letters for someone that no longer lived here! Talk about rude! The woman tried to talk over me time and time again, tried to interrupt, basically told me to bin the letters saying no one would turn up anyway!

 

When I did finally get the chance to speak I told her that I had returned all previous letters and marked "not known at this address" and she stated that it was impossible as they had only just taken over the account blah blah blah, and I said they were from Muck Hall who she said they were nothing to do with them! Oh yes you are I replied! :D

 

She basically told me to ignore the letters and throw them away, don't bother returning them or wasting your money on spending on the postage, no one will turn up!

 

she was very rude and shouted over me down the phone and this was only over a few letters, god knows what she would be like if she was trying to get money out of you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You made it quite clear in previous correspondence that you believed the debt was statute barred) (and I presume you have proof that you sent the letters) and they continue to harrass you by passing the debt on whilst you have a very valid dispute....this is a clear breach...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info guys, I have definitely kept all my paperwork and copie of letters sent to them along with the recorded delivery numbers so I will scour my files, photocopy it all and sent to the FSA and OFT - what them burn in hell!!!! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...