Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • My ex blamed me for her not paying her bills she says I controlled her money. So I have been told I need to pay them as it was my fault. She has not paid the bills where she lives now which was my house. I'm not allowed contact with her and again she is blaming me. As in this type of case it is victim led so no matter what stupid thing she says she is believed. It is for me to prove otherwise.
    • No SAR yet but they have confirmed via email that they have everything and will supply it by this month end.    When you say the FOS considered it a personal loan due to personal guarantee who is the FOS? Financial Ombudsman?  But then that doesn’t make sense as they haven’t been involved yet.    Santander in their final response to my original complaint did not agree to it. They turned my complaint down and specified that the selling dealership had agreed to treat it as personal for settlement purposes.    I guess they could not agree to it as then they would be guilty of miss selling but they gave me what I wanted by saying I would not get treated as a business customer in regards to finance charges.    Awful bank to deal with. Will never touch them again. 
    • Background I am in dispute with Clerical Medical over, amongst other things, statements that I haven't received. They didn't resolve my complaint in time so invited me to complain to the FOS, which I did The FOS investigator in his findings has written that  Clerical Medical have mow provided all missing statements apart from two. One of these is for the policy year 2021 - 2022, which they say is unavailable due to a system migration. I have twice asked the FOS investigator for a copy of his screen shot to try and resolve this discrepancy but they have ignored me so today I submitted a subject access request. I said I was primarily interested in the screen shot but I also asked for everything they held against the complaint reference number. The response I got from firstly the Data Protection Operations Senior Coordinator, then secondly the investigator was that  The investigator expanded on this and said I'll wait the 40 days and see what they come back with then make a decision on next steps at that point, but I want to make sure I've got my facts in the right order before I start arguing with them. They seem to be saying that my SAR doesn't cover the screen shot because it isn't personal data but I disagree. I have a reference number that identifies my complaint and therefore indirectly identifies me. I think that means everything that is held against that reference number, including the screen shot, is my personal data and is in scope of my SAR (subject to exemptions). Who is right?
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

DCA Motormile Finance bypassing 141 withold number. **


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4673 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

Be aware that there is a Motormile Finance Ltd (dissolved) and a Motormile Finance UK Ltd (active).

 

The active company does indeed have a valid CC licence.

 

 

Licence Number:

0628173

Licence Status:

Current

Current Applicant / Licensee:

Business Name

Company Registration Number

Motormile Finance UK Limited

06637307

Categories:

Consumer credit

Consumer hire

Credit brokerage

Debt collecting

Right To Canvass Off Trade Premises:

No

Trading Name(s) (Current):

MMF-Leasing

Money Xpress

Motormile Mortgage

Issued Date:

30-Jun-2009

Date Maintenance Payment Due:

29-Jun-2014

Legal Formation:

Body Corporate (incorporated inside UK)

Current Individuals that run the organisation:

Name

Position

Barnaby Edward Page

*

Neil Anthony Petty

*

Nature of Business:

Other

Current Address(es):

Address Type

Address

Correspondence

322, Harrogate Road, BRADFORD, West Yorkshire, BD2 3TB, United Kingdom

Principal Place Of Business

322, Harrogate Road, BRADFORD, West Yorkshire, BD2 3TB, United Kingdom

Registered Office

Sanderson House, 22, Station Road, Horsforth, LEEDS, West Yorkshire, LS18 5NT, United Kingdom

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

So all looks legit then :(

 

It was a payday loan. The loan was taken out on 3 other occasions and repaid. The last time it wasn't repaid. This was in Nov 2009. In the meantime I'd moved away to take up a position overseas, but hadn't been there long when I was invoved in an accident and hospitalised for a while. I wasn't at all well, so a friend contacted Quick Quid about my situation in Jan 2010. Their idea of a payment plan was to pay it back over 3 months - yeah right, with no income coming in at the time and when I wasn't fit to agree to anything! Then when I didn't agree to their payment plan they sold it to Mack H some time last year. Both QQ and MH had continued to pursue me though my old address and were told several times of the new one, but they didn't take any notice. I was in no position to take up the post I had moved for, so came back to the UK when I was well again. Still not 100% and not in work, but trying to get my own thing off the ground. Then last week this Motormile outfit reared its ugly head and I've only had the one contact wih them to stop them pursuing me through my old address. They haven't been given any current contact details apart from email address. MMF did however give me a history of the account, including the 3 previous loans which were repaid, the one that wasn't, including dates and the bank account it was paid into, and that as it was an internet application they had my IP address etc.

 

No payments towards the debt have been made. Any advice very welcome, thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I'm of the opinion it's designed to cause maximum fear and discomfort, although I doubt OFT/Trading Standards would agreeDoorstep visit? Without an appointment? Directly contravenes OFT Guidelines. They're so full of their own importance it makes me howl!!!

I am a lawyer, but I am an academic lawyer. I do not practice as a barrister or solicitor. You should consult a practising Solicitor BEFORE taking any Court or other action

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all your replies. Before I phoned last week I did a little digging around the internet and got the impression I wasn't dealing with any old DCA like I've dealt with and fobbed off before. It is the Bradford outfit chasing me. I feel like I'm in a minefield. How do I deal with this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dug out the letter from MMF again (sorry haven't got the facilities to copy this and put it online) and on closer inspection it says:

 

" We will shortly be passing this account to our Field Collections team, but would invite you to contact us to discuss settlement of the account within the next 5 working days"

 

Letter was dated 10th March 2011

Field Officer turned up 13th March 2011 (Sunday evening)

Letter arrived 15th March

 

Definitely goes against OFT guidance.

 

Do I have a legal leg to stand on to challenge their practices?

 

Thanks again :)

 

PS. Only number on the letter is their company number 006637307. No other licence numbers.

Edited by losingmymind
Adding PS
Link to post
Share on other sites

The small print at the bottom of the letter says

 

"MMF is a trading division of Motormile Finance UK Ltd, a company registered in England with company number 006637307". So they're b*s*ting? Wouldn't surprise me, given the experience thus far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been reading through all the posts again and am confused. Where do I go from here? I'm thinking I need to write to MMF now and definitely not call. Are there any legal challenges I can make based on the info provided by you all here? Does requesting the CCA apply for something taken out in 2009 and does it work for an internet application, which hasn't been physically signed? I've read so much on this forum generally that I got the impression the important date for CCA challenges is pre-2007. I may be wrong and have got it confused. So, what heavyweight legal jargon can I throw at them to push them away, if at all poss? Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They do have a credit license, also bear in mind we do not know who the owner of the the dissloved company was, so it could simply be the case that Mr Barnaby Page was nothing more than a employee of the dissolved company. I certainly can not see the OFT issuing the below License if he was the owner of the previous company. So i suspect there is no connection between the two companies other than him being an employee and using a similar name knowing the previous one had been dissolved. Am not defending them or debt collectors in general as you all know, by know, what i truelly think of them. But i would advise against making false complaints against them that could be seen as libel.

 

 

 

Application / Licence Details

 

 

Licence Number:0628173

Licence Status:Current

 

Current Applicant / Licensee:

 

Business NameCompany Registration NumberMotormile Finance UK Limited06637307

 

Categories:

 

Consumer credit Consumer hire Credit brokerage Debt collecting

 

Right To Canvass Off Trade Premises:No

 

 

Trading Name(s) (Current):

 

MMF-Leasing Money Xpress Motormile Mortgage

 

Issued Date: 30-Jun-2009

Date Maintenance Payment Due: 29-Jun-2014

 

 

Legal Formation:

 

Body Corporate (incorporated inside UK)

 

Current Individuals that run the organisation:

 

NamePositionBarnaby Edward Page Neil Anthony Petty

 

Nature of Business:

 

Other

 

Current Address(es):

 

Address TypeAddressCorrespondence322, Harrogate Road, BRADFORD, West Yorkshire, BD2 3TB, United KingdomPrincipal Place Of Business322, Harrogate Road, BRADFORD, West Yorkshire, BD2 3TB, United KingdomRegistered OfficeSanderson House, 22, Station Road, Horsforth, LEEDS, West Yorkshire, LS18 5NT, United Kingdom

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Always seek the advice of an insured qualified professional. All my legal and nonlegal knowledge comes from either here (CAG),my own personal research and experience and/or as the result of necessity as an Employer and Businessman.

 

By using my advice in any form, you agreed to waive all rights to hold myself or any persons representing myself of any liability.

 

If you PM me, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private. All PMs that are sent in missuse (including but not limited to phinishing, spam) of the PM application and/or PMs that are threatening or abusive will be reported to the Site Team and if necessary to the police and/or relevant Authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been reading through all the posts again and am confused. Where do I go from here? I'm thinking I need to write to MMF now and definitely not call. Are there any legal challenges I can make based on the info provided by you all here? Does requesting the CCA apply for something taken out in 2009 and does it work for an internet application, which hasn't been physically signed? I've read so much on this forum generally that I got the impression the important date for CCA challenges is pre-2007. I may be wrong and have got it confused. So, what heavyweight legal jargon can I throw at them to push them away, if at all poss? Many thanks.

 

 

Yes send a CCA to Quick Quid, chances are like most payday lenders, the agreement will not be enforceable. Plus it will more likely show the amount your applied for and not the amount you actually received as a loan.

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Always seek the advice of an insured qualified professional. All my legal and nonlegal knowledge comes from either here (CAG),my own personal research and experience and/or as the result of necessity as an Employer and Businessman.

 

By using my advice in any form, you agreed to waive all rights to hold myself or any persons representing myself of any liability.

 

If you PM me, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private. All PMs that are sent in missuse (including but not limited to phinishing, spam) of the PM application and/or PMs that are threatening or abusive will be reported to the Site Team and if necessary to the police and/or relevant Authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

core bet you're worried....not

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL. that must be scary. Tell them were to go l would. Anyway ask them if the grass is patchy on the other side. It will confuse them for a little while.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How did they 'see through' the 141 to lift the number I had called from?

To go back to the original question...

 

I don't want to go into great detail as I'm sure some DCA's who are regular visitors to CAG would delight in the sort of systems I've been dabbling with. I've been involved in setting up telephone services were this can be done, the withheld number can be found in call reports. It only available on certain business lines and the customer has to make a declaration relating to the use of the information.

Be good to those who give you advice that helps - click the star to give them your thanks by way of a reputation credit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

To go back to the original question...I don't want to go into great detail as I'm sure some DCA's who are regular visitors to CAG would delight in the sort of systems I've been dabbling with. I've been involved in setting up telephone services were this can be done, the withheld number can be found in call reports. It only available on certain business lines and the customer has to make a declaration relating to the use of the information.

 

Now that is interesting!

And is extremely questionable, unless this procedure is used for the security of the state, anti terrorism, emergency calls etc, then it will be very very illegal as it is an invasion of privacy.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...