Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My sister phoned to mention to BT about cancelling her broadband and they never mentioned £800 fee. Her bills kept going up which she was struggling to afford. Earlier they reduced her payments taking Sky Sports off but failed to mention a new contract had started. All sounds very strange. Apparenty she was in a 24 month contract she didn't realise. My mom had been ill and my sister was having a stressful time. She went to Sky as it was far cheaper. She has a contract with BT mobile and phoned up as it wasn't working then came the shock she owed them £800 and they have barred her mobile. Shocking service and I can't speak to.them on her behalf. Who has £800.to tussle up? Obviously she is really stressed over this and don't think she will sleep tonight. Thanks BT great service Not
    • how can it add to the time.. if they lose its as if the claim was never raised..they LOST.  
    • Thanks for replying, i informed the seller in December 20, they initially sent me the email below.   ""With reference to your valued order and our recent inspection of your images. We have now investigated your concerns and can confirm that there are no manufacturing defects present and your carpet is reacting normally. The change of appearance of your carpet is due to the way in which the pile has settled unevenly with use and can show in some areas more than others. This is caused by the heavy traffic concentrated onto a small area coupled with the twisting of feet as you turn. All carpets have places where it is walked on more than others. This is a normal characteristic of any carpet and pile reversal and pile compression is not considered a manufacturing defect and is a natural occurrence in any carpet with some showing the effect more than others In way of a more detailed explanation it is the sides of the tufts of your carpet that appear a lighter, more silvery shade than when the tufts are viewed end-on. As the pile settles, lighter and darker patches develop depending on the angle of the pile. It is quite common for pile to settle in different directions to the normal pile lay as foot traffic bends the pile different ways and this will dull the appearance and will distort very slightly the appearance as you must appreciate. The angle of the pile has no effect on the durability of the carpet and we are confident it will continue to give you many years of satisfactory service. This effect can be rejuvenated to a degree by regular use of a vacuum cleaner with a rotating brush mechanism on the head In conclusion, we would confirm there are no manufacturing defects present with your carpet and we hope our explanation will further clarify your understanding of the carpet’s characteristics.""     i objected to their explanation and they have agreed to send one of their surveyors when restrictions are lifted, my stance if they say there is no fault then surely the carpet does not posses reasonable durability based on the purchase price.   Thanks
    • Marsdens did not even acknowledge any of the letters. I think they ignored them so people get bored.   I am just thankful that it was not me who owed the money. I do not know what I would have done.   Do they usually collect debts from at least 8 years ago? I am just getting the date from my son he has the cctv record.   I really wanted to know if they were allowed to go into an address that had nothing to do with the debt. Mostly because I am afraid anyone can just walk into my home.   My daughter moved into the property 6 years ago . The man Richard whos name was on the paperwork moved out of that property approx 8 ytars ago. He never lived at my address.   The date the bailiff came into my house was 12th Oct 2020 at 13:11pm
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

MIB-Close Credit Management - Claim issued


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2676 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

Then I think we are both in agreement MIB/CCM are juggling a few lemons here!

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
  • Replies 324
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi, called the national debt-line this afternoon and they told me that after doing some research on the matter they believe that the debt is definitely SB and advised me to write a letter to them which can found on their website, stating that the debt is SB and that you are not paying them anything.

Ive sent them my letter so here's hoping that's the last I hear of them!!!

ManInBlack

Link to post
Share on other sites
oh yes - of course. It was just the very minor point where you mentioned that the injured party had already brought a claim.

 

Yes sorry, I was referring to an earlier part of the debate, still got it in my head.

 

That is very promising news then i.ash, lets see what, if anything they come back with, although I fear it will be a very foolish and uneducated decision to pursue this, unless of course they know something the rest of the population don't!

 

Keep us up to speed with any news..

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 have also received similar to what others have. On 14/12 received letter from MIB & CCM, responded to along the lines of statue barred, received no reply whatsoever. Then early jan i received a judgment for claimant from the county court.

 

Am in the process of asking for the judgement to be set aside, as i received no claim form, whilst also asking for it to be struck out as it is statute barred.

 

Was involved in an accident in 03, where i went into the back of a car. Police gave me a producer, to which i provided my insurance details at court. Never heard anything up until this letter from MIB & CCM on 14/12/10.

 

I told them that obviously i was insured at the time, and i successfully produced my details, as otherwise i would have been done for driving without insurance, something i have never been convicted of. Also advised them in the letter, that i cannot recall who my insurer was seven years ago.

 

Am in two minds now about sending off for this judgement to be set aside. Any suggestions anybody???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Found this question and answer to the statute barred question, apparently the answer was provided by a barrister who's been serving for 3 years, i've tried posting a link but it wont let me.

 

Question -

9 years ago i had a road traffic accident wherby i drove into the back of someone. I exchanged details at the scene but it then transpired my insurance had lapsed. I tried to resolve the matter with the other driver and left it with the other driver to contact me. I have not recieved any corrospondace untill 2 weeks ago when i got a letter through the post from a credit agerncy saying the MIB had paid out and i now owed £7,500. The company would give me no further detail. I have now recieved a letter from the court saying i must arrange payment or argue the case. I've tried writing a letter back saying I require further details as I have never admitted liability and require the details of what has been paid out, also wrote a letter to say I believe the debt to be statute barred under the limitations act.

 

 

Answer -

They (mib) do have to get over limitation. Conventionally limitation rules mean that they cannot pursue a debt that is 6 years old. There is a section in the legislation that they can rely on which allows them to pursue a time barred debt if it appears to the court that it would be 'equitable' to do so. A matter of driving without insurance is, ultimately, a criminal offence and it could be argued that it would be equitable to allow continuance. Its never that simple though. They also have to account for the time delay. This is quite an old debt. Unless they are making allegations that you deliberately avoided their attempts to contact you then that may be a real problem for them. I would not arrange to pay for anything yet. They need to get over limitation first. I would invite them to try to do so. If they get over that hurdle then you are liable Im afraid. They had to pay out because you were uninsured although I realise that was an error but there can be no sensible defence arising from the facts. The only issue to consider is that you would be liable for their costs if they won the time barring point.

Edited by wotsy
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 sent an email to mib about theirs and ccm's letters, saying it's the first i'd heard from them in around 6 yearsish, i got a long winded reply back and the last few paragraphs go like this -

 

 

As you will appreciate, as a result of your complaint we have conducted a thourough investigation into this case. Whilst you did complete and sign our agreement back in Feb 2004, (i can't remember doing this) you did dispute liability for causing the accident (or this) and we should of been in further communication with you regarding the events leading up to the collission. We should of provided you with the oppertunity to confirm that you were willing to defend yourself in court before we settled the claims.

 

We must sincerely apologise that we did not give you this oppertunity, nor did we request further information regarding the accident circumstances. As a consequence we preceded to settle the claims and have then returned to you for recovery of our outlay. In these circumstances we will not be pursuing you any further and our file of papers is now closed. For your peace of mind, your credit rating has not been affected by our actions (or that of our agents) -

 

:whoo:

 

So i'd urge anyone that mib and ccm have recently been in touch with to email mib as this seems the best way to get your case investigated......

Edited by wotsy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh wow, that's excellent news Wotsy. That would have been nice to receive, we instead received a reply to our request for details from MIB saying the issue had been passed to CCM and we should therefore speak to them directly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh wow, that's excellent news Wotsy. That would have been nice to receive, we instead received a reply to our request for details from MIB saying the issue had been passed to CCM and we should therefore speak to them directly.

 

Try complaining via email to - feedback@ mib.org.uk (without the space)

Ask them why you didn't hear from them for years.

Tell them you wasn't given the chance to defend yourself.

I also added that I believed it was a fraudulent claim.

It's worth a try if you haven't already done this.

Edited by wotsy
Link to post
Share on other sites

From Wotsy's post the following is very revealing:

"We should of provided you with the oppertunity to confirm that you were willing to defend yourself in court before we settled the claims.

 

We must sincerely apologise that we did not give you this opportunity, nor did we request further information regarding the accident circumstances. As a consequence we preceded to settle the claims and have then returned to you for recovery of our outlay."

 

How many other recipients of these claims might have chosen to defend because I'm getting the impression that the MIB have been stepping into the shoes of many and ultimately being defeated in court without all the evidence and often apparently without the knowledge or permission of those alleged to be involved too?

 

Good result BTW Wotsy underscores the importance of standing up for yourself.

As of 03/03/12 please do not under any circumstances wait for my further input or guidance on any current thread or defence of a court claim I might have been involved in on or through Cag.

Jasper1965

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still wouldn't let them off that lightly, their abysmal admin should never have raised these issues in the first place, it is very clear that they are doing something wrong as it isn't just one person that has received these letters.

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
Hi wotsi...

Any chance u could post a copy of the letter u sent to the mib?

Thanx

Ash

 

This is what I sent via E-mail to feedback@ mib.org.uk (without the space) -

 

On the **/12/2010 I recieved letters from Close Credit Management and Motor

Insurers Bureau (they both arrived in the same envelope) saying i owe £****.**

for a claim made against me in 1994! This is the first i've heard of this claim

in 6 years! I believe this is a fraudulent claim and after a quick internet

search it seems there's lots of people received the exact same letters about

dubious claims that've happened years ago. I'd like to know why I've not been

contacted about this matter in 6 years? I've not had a chance to defend myself

and apparently lots of interest and charges have been added onto this money

owing. The mib reference on the letter is - *******

 

Any help on this matter would be greatly appreciated.

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Mr * *****

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanx wotsy... I have sent off my letter today. Can I ask if at the time of the accident you got any points on your license or a fine for driving without insurance?

 

Thanx in advance.

Ash

ManInBlack

Link to post
Share on other sites

A criminal conviction is usually largely irrelevant in civil proceedings unless it is causative of the Tort. For instance, if you were sat stationary at traffic lights and someone rear-ended you, but you didn't have car insurance - not having insurance would not have caused the accident to happen (unless you believe in sod's law), therefore the Court would discount this conviction/illegal act when assessing fault in the claim. The only consequences that can really be considered by these things is the persons character, which if its one word against another, this may be taken into account.

 

As such, any claim by the MIB is realistically not going to hinge on whether you had points or no insurance at the time, unless it led to the accident happening, which is very unlikely.

 

Given that Wotsy's letter seems to have achieved an excellent result despite its lack of lack of legal argument etc (no criticism of the email intended), it would appear that the MIB are just sending out letters before action without much forethought and so every single one should be equally queried and/or denied it would seem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the letters in December of last year from CCM and the MIB for around six big ones due to my better half hitting another car without insurance.

Again there has been no contact for almost 7 years until now.

Sent CCM the e-mail below which I copied from this forum and they must now they have no legal right to claim the outstanding debt as they sent me the following statement and bolted.

 

 

Dear *******,

I can confirm your account has been returned to our client, MIB.

Any further collections activity will now be actioned by MIB.

Kind regards

 

 

 

CCM

 

 

 

E-MAIL

 

 

 

Any attempt by yourselves to bring a claim against me outside the period allowable for a personal injury claim by claiming rights subrogated to yourselves will be easily defeated by the the dictum "Nemo Dat Quod Non habet" which confirms that any rights subrogated to yourselves cannot lawfully exist in any greater degree than those afforded the subrogator.

The subrogator had the right to commence action within a period of three years and chose not to do so. this right cannot lawfully be subrogated in any way which infers a greater right upon the recipient, if you were afforded those rights within the three year period it was for you to commence action within the relevant time as set out within Sec 11 Limitation Act 1980. If you were afforded those rights outside the three year period, then you have never had the legal right to bring proceedings against me.

you failed to commence action within the specified time limit for personal injury and it is therefore denied that any attempt to pursue me for the amount claimed is valid and that your threats to commence legal proceedings against me are unfounded as no right to any such action exists.

These threats where no right exists are classed as harassment under Sec 40 of the Administaration of Justice Act 1970 and if conducted as a commercial practice are forbidden by CPUTR's. My counsels view is that we are not in a consumer relationship in respect of this matter so the criminal offence of harrassment is the offence which shall be cited in the event of any further unwarranted demands from yourselves regarding this matter.

I trust this is clear to you.

No right to action exists as you are out of time to bring any such action and I hereby state that I have no intention of voluntarily paying any sum to yourselves in respect of this or any other related matter.

For you to continue to pursue me will constitute a criminal offence, I will however require written confirmation from you that you will take no further action against me and will cease sending me lawfully unfounded threatening letters.

If you do issue proceedings against me any such action will be stoutly defended on but not limited to the points set out in this letter , statute barred is in itself a complete defence, and a copy of this letter and any other evidence I hold will be used before the Court to prove that any such claim was vexatious and a wasted costs order will be sought against yourselves.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THIS WORKED FOR ME ON THE CCM,NOW FOR THE MIB!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just recieved a letter from CCM and MIB relating to an accident i was involved in May 2003.

 

Claiming £ 45,807.75!!!

 

Standard format as per all the other victims here.

 

The other driver with whom I collided in the middle of a junction was able to exit the vehicle and walk. My vehicle at the time cost me £ 600 the day before and due to a technicality was not insured. His vehicle couldn't possibly be worth more than £1500-£2000 at the time.

 

I am astounded not only by the letter so many years after the incedent but the sheer amount claimed by a person who walked from the vehicle.

 

I was found guilty of driving with no insurance for which i was puinished by the courts. This does not however by default make me 100% responsible for the accident. I suffered the financial loss of my vehicle plus recovery costs.

 

What now concerns me is that i was never given an opportunity to take part in negotiations of blame. I was not offered any evidence to suggest that my driving was negligent. The involvement of the courts and the police ended once i was prosecuted for no insurance.

 

I have to date recieved no correspondence via normal post or as I would expect recorded delivery.

 

I have held a full clean licence and valid car insurance since the event and therefore with the powers the MIB posess they were in a position to make contact with me.

 

Im guessing start with CCM as per the previous post and then aim the fend of the MIB with stat bar letters.

 

This thread couldnt have been more usefull today having opened the letter this morning. Thankyou ALL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ensure you raise these complaints with ALL of the following,

OFT&TS via http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/contact

 

BBC Watchdog, it will be extremely useful to others who are not aware of CAG.http://www.bbc.co.uk/watchdog/gotastory/

 

And your local MP http://www.writetothem.com/

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
Just recieved a letter from CCM and MIB relating to an accident i was involved in May 2003.

 

Claiming £ 45,807.75!!!

 

Standard format as per all the other victims here.

 

The other driver with whom I collided in the middle of a junction was able to exit the vehicle and walk. My vehicle at the time cost me £ 600 the day before and due to a technicality was not insured. His vehicle couldn't possibly be worth more than £1500-£2000 at the time.

 

I am astounded not only by the letter so many years after the incedent but the sheer amount claimed by a person who walked from the vehicle.

 

I was found guilty of driving with no insurance for which i was puinished by the courts. This does not however by default make me 100% responsible for the accident. I suffered the financial loss of my vehicle plus recovery costs.

 

What now concerns me is that i was never given an opportunity to take part in negotiations of blame. I was not offered any evidence to suggest that my driving was negligent. The involvement of the courts and the police ended once i was prosecuted for no insurance.

 

I have to date recieved no correspondence via normal post or as I would expect recorded delivery.

 

I have held a full clean licence and valid car insurance since the event and therefore with the powers the MIB posess they were in a position to make contact with me.

 

Im guessing start with CCM as per the previous post and then aim the fend of the MIB with stat bar letters.

 

This thread couldnt have been more usefull today having opened the letter this morning. Thankyou ALL.

 

My advise would be to start with MIB, send an email to feedback@mib.org.uk and complain about not hearing from them for years and the main reason to complain is that you wasn't given a chance to defend yourself.

When MIB receive your email they get straight onto CCM and instruct them to put your account on hold whilst MIB investigate your file.

I got a letter from MIB today again apologising for not giving me the chance to defend myself and confirming they're no longer pursuing me. Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the insurance company would have taken care of any repairs to the other vehicle, IF it was found that your BF was at fault. Didn't the insurance company at the time pay out, or were they not aware of any claim?

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

As far as I know the insurance company were not aware of any claim, thats if he was def insured (must ring them). I did phone the debtline after reading a few threads on here but I dont feel they were too helpful

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah debtline are very good in areas, but I have found them failing in others, moneymatters and consumer direct are very good for info.

 

Confirm the question of insurance or not, then if there was Ins at the time, this should have been dealt with by them.

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

My son nudged the back of somebody's car TEN years ago - he went to court, got points and a fine, have heard nothing since (as far as he was concerned it was dealt with in the court as there was an insurance issue). Then out of the blue the week before Christmas he got a letter from MIB then about two days later a letter from CCM saying that he owes £65,000 and to ring them within the next seven days to inform them how he would be paying it!! well he never rang but since that time I have been bombarded with phone calls from them - a statute barred letter has been sent but they said that it probably would not count in this instance and they still phone (two calls today) but I do not now answer them as we have asked them to put the reasons why he owes £65,000 in writing. Have also sent an email to the MIB stating that we have not heard anything from anyone for ten years, and why all of a sudden is this money being demanded considering the woman was perfectly fine and even got out of her car and told my son that he was not at fault as the car in front of her had suddenly stopped and that she had a job to avoid hitting the rear of the car in front of her. Oh nearly forgot, the person my son bumped into was a woman and yet the CCM have quoted that it was a male - perhaps the £65,000 is to pay for the obvious sex change!!!!!

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...