Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • i hope Yasmeen Couser is going to be at this hearing else their WS is totally inadmissible.   dx  
    • Government launches call for evidence on video game loot boxes     READ MORE HERE: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-launches-call-for-evidence-on-video-game-loot-boxes
    • They can still write to you after the 14 day limit but they can only pursue the driver as they have lost the ability to chase the keeper.   I hope that you have not divulged who was driving. Never talk to these guys on the phone. They lie and harass as well as taping conversations.   Only write and do not appeal as they never agree that the motorist is right.   Please reply to the questions on post 2 so we can give you the best advice to avoid paying these crooks.
    • Hi   I think you also need to send this company a Subject Access Request (SAR) simply asking for 'ALL DATA' that simple phrase covers whichever format they hold it in whether it be written, email phone recording etc.   They then have 30 Calendar day to respond only once they have acknowledged receipt of your SAR request. note a SAR if now Free   As for them stating they don't have to stop processing your data they need to comply with the General Data Protection Regulations 2018 (GDPR) which is now part of Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA)   This link breaks down the GDPR so its easier to understand your rights:  https://www.privacy-regulation.eu/en/index.htm    
    • There is so much wrong with their WS.   You stopped for a very short time yet she seems to equate that as being parked! That flies in the face of what parking means.   There have been several cases in Court where Judges have defined the meaning of parked. Not one of them describes it as stopping for a few minutes with the engine running and the driver remaining in the vehicle. And why on earth is POFA being included on s28? The airport comes under Byelaws and that land is specifically not covered by POFA.   Then on s30 she cites Parking Eye v Beavis talking about establishing a contract between the parking company and the motorist to park!   then from s33 to s40 they are trying to bamboozle the Court by trying to minimise the effect of the Byelaws. It is the borough of Southend on Sea that decides the rules there- https://d1z15fh6odiy9s.cloudfront.net/files/sen-byelaws-1983-297c76b8.   S12 and s13 confirm that the signs erected by the Council are the ones to be observed.   You can also use the Forum search box and cases that have been won against VCS above.   s46 The claimant submits the signs are not prohibitive!    The dictionary description of" Prohibitive"- (of a law or rule) forbidding or restricting something.  If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck...Is she dumb or what. s47 Further misdirection-this is nothing to do with parking s48 refers to the" lawful occupier" not the landowner which is Southend Council.  I end up going back to s5 which gives the impression that VCS complies totally with their Code of Practice and therefore you, the motorist must be guilty. yet Time and time again VCS loses in Court because they have not complied with their CoP.   The Parking Prankster indicates some of them.  http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2017/02/   and in the case below they took someone to Court knowing that they did not have the right to take this person to Court at all. http://nebula.wsimg.com/e3da92cb966c72de63ec1f98605c2954?AccessKeyId=4CB8F2392A09CF228A46&disposition=0&alloworigin=1   VCS v Ms O C8DP9D8C Birmingham 1/8/2017 this was taking a motorist to Court  when the contract for the car park was down to Excel. VCS have lost many cases in Court knowing that they did not have the right to sue as there was no contract between them and motorists-total breach of their CoP and should have put their ability to access motorists data  were it not for the weakness of DVLA and the IPC. VCS v Ms M. 3QZ53955 25/01/2016 Claim discontinued. Costs awarded to motorist. as above-masquerading as Excel yet again.
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 4 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Mackenzie Hall, problems.


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3614 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

 

Here's a good one for you all and will show you how low and truly despicable this lot really are!

 

I have been fighting debt for about 18 months and have only 2 outstanding left.

 

One with BOI which has an unenforcable CCA and has been passed around ending up with Red Castle (Gothia) who cannot do diddly! the other is Vanquis which unsurprisingly has been passed around the usual idiots and it is now with bigger idiots, Lowells who have it on hold are are getting Vanquis to search their archives for the CCA, actually there is no signed CCA but who am I to ruin their fun!

 

The rest, of which there were many, are all now well and truly statute barred and have dropped off my CRA files some months ago.

 

Last week I thought that I might apply for a credit builder credit card to try and build my rating back up.

 

I applied for AQUA Card, which I didn't get, no surprise there!

 

Anyhow, less than 24hrs later guess who started calling me on my landline?

 

I'll give you a clue, think ****, rotten to the core, evil, nasty, horrible, shouldn't be allowed to be in business etc. etc.

 

Got it yet?

 

None other than Mackenzie Hall!

 

I just told them to pi55 off and put the phone down on them!

 

From what I gather has happened my application has opened to door for these to55ers to try and collect AGAIN on my statute barred debts!

 

They have been phishing for me for ages trying to get me for 2 MBNA statute barred accounts, sending letters and postcards etc. but I've always ignored them.

 

I am dumbfounded at they way that they are allowed to operate and now regret not playing the game with them and getting some evidence for Alan Stewart to put in their file.

 

Obviously Muck Hall simply do not care about the OFT's Censure on them and are continuing to 'try it on' in the hope that they can con someone into paying them.

 

When is Mr. Stewart and his companions at the OFT going to put an end to this once and for all?

 

Usually when Muck Hall contacted me before I knew that I was home and dry but this time I have seen a real 'dark' side to their business practices.

 

Any thoughts?

 

RI

Link to post
Share on other sites

This goes to show we are truely in the Big Brother Is Watching era. Now supposedly 'Aqua' took your details and 'proccessed' them (took a brief look at your cra files). Then, one of 2 things happened - co-incidenally (I think not) Mucky just 'happened' to check a few days later (is this appearing as a search anywhere), or, and is more likely they were actually 'tipped off' by the CRA involved - far more likely.

 

Now, can this therefore be construed as a mis-use of your acceptance of the DPA to which you signed up for (grammer, but you get where I am coming from?). They may have had your permission to 'look' at your data, but did they have permission to pass it around to anyone they like? This could be 'proved' if there is no search from mucky appearing on a relevant date on your CRA files - I think a complaint to ICO on this is called for?

Every journey begins with a single step :):)

 

Please note: I have no qualifications in this area - my advice is learned from the wonderful members of this Forum. Thanks to you all for your help.

 

If you have found my post helpful please leave a short message by clicking the star to the left of my profile - Thank You

 

The only person entitled to your Personal Finance details is a Judge not a DCA

 

Move all banking activity to another banking group if you have a dispute - your funds can be used to offset debts within the same group.

Be careful with Banking details (card/account numbers) as these can be used to take unauthorised payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...