Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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

Meritforce/GE Capital (First National Tricity Finance)/Aktiv Kapital


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5002 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 all,I have been contacted by the above who I have never heard of.

 

Is Meritforce doorstep collection agents a part of Mackenzie Hall Ltd?

 

Letter headed.

 

Pursuers: Aktiv Kapital

 

Original Creditor: GE Capital (First National Tricity Finance)

 

This debt is well over 6 years old could be more.

 

AUTHORISED COLLECTOR VISIT.

 

The letter reads as follows:

Due to non-payment of the above we have been instucted by Mackenzie Hall Ltd to collect this debt on their behalf.

 

An authorised collector will make a visit to your property within the next 10 days.

 

Should our collector inform us that no positive commitment towards clearing the debt has taken place,your account will be returned to this office and formal proceedings may be considered.

 

If you do not want our collector to call and would rather arrange settlement,you must contact our clients Mackenzie Hall Ltd on xxxxxxxx asking for Robert Taylor before the 16th July.

 

Should you fail to make a payment and action is taken, additional costs may be added to your debt.

 

We look forward to hearing from you.No more reminders will be sent.

 

Any advice please,do I ignore or respond. I have never sent a CCA letter re this account.:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,I have been contacted by the above who I have never heard of.

 

Is Meritforce doorstep collection agents a part of Mackenzie Hall Ltd? Yes. Mackenzie Hall took Meritforce over in 2007.

 

Letter headed.

 

Pursuers: Aktiv Kapital

 

Original Creditor: GE Capital (First National Tricity Finance)

 

This debt is well over 6 years old could be more. Then it's statute barred, and the statute barred letter from the Templates Library applies. Get into no discussion or mediation with them - there is nothing to discuss.

 

AUTHORISED COLLECTOR VISIT. Authorised by who? Certainly not by yourself!

 

The letter reads as follows:

Due to non-payment of the above we have been instucted by Mackenzie Hall Ltd to collect this debt on their behalf.

 

An authorised collector will make a visit to your property within the next 10 days. No he won't. 'Tort of trespass' also applies.

 

Should our collector inform us that no positive commitment towards clearing the debt has taken place,your account will be returned to this office and formal proceedings may be considered. No he won't, because he'll never visit with your permission - put the account where you want, there is no longer any obligation for it to be paid - formal proceedings won't get past first base, because it's statute barred.

 

If you do not want our collector to call and would rather arrange settlement,you must contact our clients Mackenzie Hall Ltd on xxxxxxxx asking for Robert Taylor before the 16th July. You could ignore them completely, which is another option you could take.

 

Should you fail to make a payment and action is taken, additional costs may be added to your debt. No they won't.

 

We look forward to hearing from you. Well, they're going to be disappointed.

 

No more reminders will be sent. Pity.

 

Any advice please,do I ignore or respond. I have never sent a CCA letter re this account.:mad:

 

 

You could either ignore or respond.

 

CCA letter first may be an idea, just to see what they come back with. However, do not sign your letter, but if you do, ensure your signature is changed sufficiently for you to identify if they try a cut-and-paste job on you. Just to annoy them, it may be worth doing this.

 

However, knowing MH as well as I do, there is little to no chance a CCA request will be fulfilled, so if you want to save time, the statute barred letter may be a better bet - if you're absolutely sure there has been no written acknowledgement of debt, or payment in a six year period (5 years if you're in Scotland).

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could either ignore or respond.

 

CCA letter first may be an idea, just to see what they come back with. However, do not sign your letter, but if you do, ensure your signature is changed sufficiently for you to identify if they try a cut-and-paste job on you. Just to annoy them, it may be worth doing this.

 

However, knowing MH as well as I do, there is little to no chance a CCA request will be fulfilled, so if you want to save time, the statute barred letter may be a better bet - if you're absolutely sure there has been no written acknowledgement of debt, or payment in a six year period (5 years if you're in Scotland).

 

Hi thanks for your reply, I am going to firstly send the CCA letter and see what happens then I will take it from there and try to upset them a bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You would be better to send them the statute barred letter by recorded, with paragraphs added about not authorising any doorstep collectors call.

 

Sending the CCA, I would think would not be worth it, as it will just go ignored.

 

My experience of MH from dealing with a relatives case, is that once you have sent them a recorded delivery letter stating that this is getting them nowhere and they should refer back to the current assignees/owners of the debt i.e. Aktiv Kapitol, they will do this and write back you, confirming this. Once MH realise that you know the debt is SB'd and do not want to come to any arrangement, per OFT guidelines, they should stop all communications to you.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

No point in giving Muck Hall a quid for the CCA which they wont even produce anyway. Send them the Stat Barred letter along with the do not darken my doorstep letter. Ignore any other begging letters from them

Link to post
Share on other sites

No point in giving Muck Hall a quid for the CCA which they wont even produce anyway. Send them the Stat Barred letter along with the do not darken my doorstep letter. Ignore any other begging letters from them

 

Hi ODC, I have decided to ignore the letter completely.I was being pestered by Aktiv Kapital for a while but as I did not respond to any of there letters they have now got these people involved hoping it will make me respond.:-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meritforce will send one of their doorstep collection team around. Not that they can do anything. Just if you get into any conversation, could be embarassing, if over heard by neighbours.

 

MH sent Meritforce to my address regarding a debt owed by someone who had never lived at my address. These people are self employed, often don't live in the area, so get a bit p**d off when they have made a wasted journey.

 

Best option is to send the statute barred letter by recorded, with the addition of not authorising doorstep collection. You have it on record then and if necessary can use this, if you need to take your complaint further.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meritforce will send one of their doorstep collection team around. Not that they can do anything. Just if you get into any conversation, could be embarassing, if over heard by neighbours.

 

MH sent Meritforce to my address regarding a debt owed by someone who had never lived at my address. These people are self employed, often don't live in the area, so get a bit p**d off when they have made a wasted journey.

 

Best option is to send the statute barred letter by recorded, with the addition of not authorising doorstep collection. You have it on record then and if necessary can use this, if you need to take your complaint further.

 

 

Hi, thanks for your reply and advice.I do not think that a Statute Barred letter will be of any use as I think I was still paying this debt until we moved 3 years ago at a rate of £1 a month.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With Meritfarce aka Muck Hall thats as good a policy as any. Muck Hall get bored and crawl back under their stone. Meritfarce do make visits but if you are happy enough to deal with them then let things sit

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please please report this blatant breach of OFT guidelines to the OFT and to East Ayrshire Trading Standards, a Mr Alan Stewart is dealing with Mucky Hall and any evidence should be sent to him directly. He is very good at stopping them, pity he cant get them closed down completely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the OP does not inform the Kilmarnock Cowboys that the alleged date is Stat Barred then he cant really complain to TS that they are breaching the OFT Guidelines

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the OP does not inform the Kilmarnock Cowboys that the alleged date is Stat Barred then he cant really complain to TS that they are breaching the OFT Guidelines

 

Thanks for all your replies ODC,in your opinion should I send a statute barred letter and see what happens.I am getting a bit confused at what is the best route to take in this case.:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meritforce will send one of their doorstep collection team around. Not that they can do anything. Just if you get into any conversation, could be embarassing, if over heard by neighbours.

 

MH sent Meritforce to my address regarding a debt owed by someone who had never lived at my address. These people are self employed, often don't live in the area, so get a bit p**d off when they have made a wasted journey.

 

Best option is to send the statute barred letter by recorded, with the addition of not authorising doorstep collection. You have it on record then and if necessary can use this, if you need to take your complaint further.

 

I got the same letter, Im looking forward to good old Robert Taylor paying me a visit, he will enjoy meeting bulldozer, just hope bulldozer likes him, tends not to like trespassers

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the process of ignoring meritforce's 4th letter all of which have been exactly the same so so much for "no further reminders will be sent"

I have never recieved a visit yet which is quite disappointing as they would get no change from me.

I have never sent them any replies as i like them wasting money on me and aren't bothered about the "authorised collector" threat

I think we both well know my alledged debt is well statute barred.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the process of ignoring meritforce's 4th letter all of which have been exactly the same so so much for "no further reminders will be sent"

I have never recieved a visit yet which is quite disappointing as they would get no change from me.

I have never sent them any replies as i like them wasting money on me and aren't bothered about the "authorised collector" threat

I think we both well know my alledged debt is well statute barred.

 

Like you ratboy im really disappointed that they never turn up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the letter it says ask for Jonathan Kerr but the signature looks nothing like that, too many letters in surname for starters. It used to be Craig Bryant, whats happened to him??

"If you do not want our collector to call and would rather arrange settlement blah blah blah"

Tricky one that, the choices as i see it are pay these lowlife £400 or tell some clown who may possibly knock on the door to f*** right off

think i'll go for option b

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

After four letters with the empty threat of an authorised collector visit from meritforce they must have got bored as the latest letter is from mackenzie hall again. This one is a "FINAL OFFER - IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED" Deadline for further action; 7days" with scary red capital print too. This is a TIME BARRED OFFER and if payment is not recieved in their office by yesterday (15/8) then further action which could well be another red letter to ignore. On the bottom of the letter is a standing order mandate to take money from my account, i think not but may well use their bank account details for the next time i have a nigerian email to update my account details.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get hold of Alan Stewart at East Ayrshire Trading Standards, he can help deal with the rainforest devestation this lot are causing.

 

Basically their TIME BARRED letters are a blatant breach of OFT guidelines and need to be reported to them too, especially if they are sent second class courier service and arrive five days after they have been dated.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...