Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Should this to be take into court with him or should he send something in earlier?
    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
  • 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
      • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Mercers Not Cashing Cheques


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5243 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

It's a good question. I would suggest that it goes someway to saying that the debtors have at least made an effort to pay, but it probably screws up the balance sheets / taxation position. It must be a nightmare for Mercers, although I thought they were part of Barclays/Barclaycard....I presume you have spoken to Barclaycard ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good question. I would suggest that it goes someway to saying that the debtors have at least made an effort to pay, but it probably screws up the balance sheets / taxation position. It must be a nightmare for Mercers, although I thought they were part of Barclays/Barclaycard....I presume you have spoken to Barclaycard ?

 

 

In the past I've found that Mercers are OK with cashing cheques - today's refusal is unusual, we've been told by a rep at Mercers to transfer everything over from Mercers to Barclaycard, a not-impossible task but still some time out of my day! I've noticed Mercers haven't cashed any cheques sent from us on behalf of our clients in November?

 

I suppose what I'm asking is, is there any specific legal obligation for Mercers themselves (not Barclaycard) to cash these?

 

 

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barclays & Barclaycard, both use Mercers and Credit solutions as their DCA's, when really they are their own In-house Collection Agency.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So should we switch over all our accounts from Mercers to Barclaycard? The irritating thing is, this has obviously put dozens of clients accounts out of whack as they refused to cash cheques last month! Nice one Mercers! After years of cashing OK...

Link to post
Share on other sites

So should we switch over all our accounts from Mercers to Barclaycard?

 

I'm certainly in no position to recommend this course of action, your dealing with them, I'm surprised that a Debt management service wouldn't know who they are dealing with, after all, they only use 'alleged solicitors/collection agencies' to intimidate the debtor and exploit their lack of knowledge.

 

I would like to think that if I ever needed the services of a DMC they would at least be more savvy than I?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm certainly in no position to recommend this course of action, your dealing with them, I'm surprised that a Debt management service wouldn't know who they are dealing with, after all, they only use 'alleged solicitors/collection agencies' to intimidate the debtor and exploit their lack of knowledge.

 

I would like to think that if I ever needed the services of a DMC they would at least be more savvy than I?

 

 

Cheers! OK, I'll put it more simply - I'm very much aware that Mercers are the collection side of Barclaycard - the issue is that we print cheques out to 'Mercers' which has been fine for many years, and we've today been told by Mercers that they will no longer cash cheques made out to Mercers - does anyone helpful know if there is specific legislation that forces Mercers to cash these, as they have now made a lot of trouble for our clients by not cashing them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers! OK, I'll put it more simply - I'm very much aware that Mercers are the collection side of Barclaycard - the issue is that we print cheques out to 'Mercers' which has been fine for many years, and we've today been told by Mercers that they will no longer cash cheques made out to Mercers - does anyone helpful know if there is specific legislation that forces Mercers to cash these, as they have now made a lot of trouble for our clients by not cashing them.

 

 

I doubt there is any legislation that requires a person/body to cash cheques sent to them but what is the problem with simply making out cheques to another party? i.e Barclaycard direct? presumably the debts are still being paid to you and your'e passing them on (minus any fees you may take)

 

There may be something in here that may apply

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

 

Under section 2.8 Section C, E & H

 

Is is your Debt Management Service alone or is it a block policy that Mercers have recently introduced?

I reside in Dawlish Warren but am not a rabbit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt there is any legislation that requires a person/body to cash cheques sent to them but what is the problem with simply making out cheques to another party? i.e Barclaycard direct? presumably the debts are still being paid to you and your'e passing them on (minus any fees you may take)

 

There may be something in here that may apply

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

 

Under section 2.8 Section C, E & H

 

Is is your Debt Management Service alone or is it a block policy that Mercers have recently introduced?

 

 

The main problem is, Mercers (wearing their Mercers hat) will expect us to send financial statements to them, not Barclaycard - but will then expect cheques to be made out to Barclaycard & sent to a different address - not the most efficient way of doing things.

 

Cheers for the info!

Link to post
Share on other sites

well contact mercers and ask them why the sudden change, dont want to be rude but a Debt management agency should at least know what is going on with Thier Clients payments, because if you dont it is not you that gets it in the neck but the poor debtor, who is after all paying a fee for what they could in effect do themselves for free

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

well contact mercers and ask them why the sudden change, dont want to be rude but a Debt management agency should at least know what is going on with Thier Clients payments, because if you dont it is not you that gets it in the neck but the poor debtor, who is after all paying a fee for what they could in effect do themselves for free

 

 

Couple of points;

 

1) Speaking to Mercers will guarantee nothing but me spending ten minutes speaking to a slack-jawed moron who will tell me black is white to get me off the phone

 

2)We very much 'get it in the neck' from creditors - they are every bit as rude & obnoxious to us as they are to our clients, and in many cases more so!

 

3)I'm noticing a trend here to demonise DMC's! Yes, people can certainly 'deal themselves' - the vast majority of our clients do, after a few months, after we have shown them the way forward, advised them in detail of how to deal with their creditors, advised about this forum, how to write SAR requests, asked their creditors for CCA info, filled in court forms for them, reassured them, asked if they have spoken to CAB (and heard the reply many times that yes they have spent three weeks now attempting to get a five-minute appointment!), mopped up after CCCS have flopped... I could go on! And all for less than many of them pay for their Sky TV...

 

I could fix my car myself - I don't, I pay a fee to get it fixed, because I am busy working all day for a living - the same reason our clients pay us a fee!

 

DMC's aren't the bad guys here - let's leave that role to the DCA's please!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of points;

 

1) Speaking to Mercers will guarantee nothing but me spending ten minutes speaking to a slack-jawed moron who will tell me black is white to get me off the phone - agree with ya there:)

2)We very much 'get it in the neck' from creditors - they are every bit as rude & obnoxious to us as they are to our clients, and in many cases more so! - true they can be we do get a fair amount on here who take the advice and run

 

3)I'm noticing a trend here to demonise DMC's! Yes, people can certainly 'deal themselves' - the vast majority of our clients do, after a few months, after we have shown them the way forward, advised them in detail of how to deal with their creditors, advised about this forum, how to write SAR requests, asked their creditors for CCA info, filled in court forms for them, reassured them, asked if they have spoken to CAB (and heard the reply many times that yes they have spent three weeks now attempting to get a five-minute appointment!), mopped up after CCCS have flopped... I could go on! And all for less than many of them pay for their Sky TV...

 

I could fix my car myself - I don't, I pay a fee to get it fixed, because I am busy working all day for a living - the same reason our clients pay us a fee!

 

DMC's aren't the bad guys here - let's leave that role to the DCA's please!

I think the demonise thing is that you came on asking a question that many would on here assume you would know the answer to

 

IMHO - tell mercers they are the ones chasing so the cheque is made out to them, you never know maybe sharkleycard are cutting back and mercers are getting the boot, well we can all live in hope:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also we do get quite a few DMC "Trolls:rolleyes:" on here trying to sell their wares

 

 

I'm not in the sales line, and I've got all the business I need!

 

Of topic of this thread, but... if everyone was a machine, then the only thing needed would be this excellent site. But people are people, and in many cases a voiceless website is just too intimidating - people want a voice to tell them that everything will be OK - all respect to CCCS etc but they are stretched to capacity (I speak from experience of working there) - I work for a smakll company that is able to take the time to inform AND reassure - and I recommend this site to all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I'm a little less weary of you....:p.. Why not ring up Barclays, and ask them why their in-house collection arm has informed you to make out cheques direct to Barclays and not Mercers?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a thread on here, quite a while ago now that asked a question about Mercers... because its a "dormant company" in the eyes of company house then officially it couldnt file accounts, hence if cheques were made out to mercers and then cashed and passed to barclays then the accounts should be filed at the end of the year. As this has not been happening this was thought to be an offense under the companies act I believe.

 

I believe the OP made a complaint/query to companies house who said they would look into it, not sure if it IS connected but could be a reason?

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I'm a little less weary of you....:p.. Why not ring up Barclays, and ask them why their in-house collection arm has informed you to make out cheques direct to Barclays and not Mercers?

 

 

Sure enough, when I spoke to one of the monkeys (after being asked for my account number about 18 times)I was told I would need to speak to the accounts department who only speak to customers! Unfortunately this company is one we've never had a DPA agreement with, so its next to impossible to get someone in authority on the phone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a thread on here, quite a while ago now that asked a question about Mercers... because its a "dormant company" in the eyes of company house then officially it couldnt file accounts, hence if cheques were made out to mercers and then cashed and passed to barclays then the accounts should be filed at the end of the year. As this has not been happening this was thought to be an offense under the companies act I believe.

 

I believe the OP made a complaint/query to companies house who said they would look into it, not sure if it IS connected but could be a reason?

 

S.

 

 

Now that's interesting... I wonder if that's the cause of this stoppage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Checking today, and they've cashed Decembers - after reading that thread I thought maybe Barclays had jumped on Mercers & asked them to specify no cheques being sent in their name - but if they've now started cashing again, I've no idea...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...