Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In short you never communicate with a Debt Collector, they have no power here at all. The snotty letter is only used to respond to a properly worded Letter Before Claim. The only time you would be recommended to contact the PPC is to send the snotty letter. You do nothing but keep the tripe they send you unless you receive a letter before claim.
    • Probably to do with the Creditor accepting the reduced payments claim as part of the IVA. - Thats my guess anyway.  As for the mount outstanding... 60k is incredible and im pretty sure a DRO wouldnt cover that much even after the new legislation.    For you @Alfy - Please stay headstrong and stop worrying. My viewpoint on debt with debt collectors is simple. You are a figure on a spreadsheet loaded into a database for them to run a collection cycle through.  They dont care about emotions or your situation, they just care about paying off their shareholders and trying to turn a profit.  They use varying tactics to increase the pressure on you to the point where you will break. People then fall for this an either cave in to DCAs before doing their own due diligence on the debts that are purchased or turn to IVAs like you have.    They are better ways to handle this and Im glad you feel better after a good nights sleep - I hope you can keep it up. 
    • Good afternoon,    I am writing in reference to the retail dispute number ****, between myself and Newton Autos concerning the sale of a Toyota Avensis which has been found to have serious mechanical faults.    As explained previously the car was found to be faulty just six days after purchase. The car had numerous fault codes that appeared on the dash board and went into limp mode. This required assistance from the AA and this evidence has already been provided. The car continues to exhibit these faults and has been diagnosed as having faults with the fuel injectors which will require major mechanical investigation and repairs.    Newton Autos did not make me aware of any faults upon purchase of the vehicle and sold it as being in good condition.    Newton Autos have also refused to honour their responsibilities under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires them to refund the customer if the goods are found to be faulty and not fit for purpose within 30 days of purchase.    Newton Autos also refused to accept my rejection of the vehicle and refused to refund the car and accept the return of the vehicle.    It is clear to me that the car is not fit for purpose as these mechanical faults occurred so soon after purchase and have been shown to be present by both the AA and an independent mechanic.   Kind regards
    • Commercial Landlords are legally allowed to sue for early cancellation of the lease. You can only surrender your lease if your landlord agrees to your doing so. They are under no obligation even to consider your request and are entitled to refuse. You cannot use this as an excuse not to pay your rent. Your landlord is most likely to agree to your surrendering the lease if they want the property back in order to redevelop it, or if they wants to rent it to what they regards as a better tenant or at a higher rent. There are two types of surrender: Express surrender in writing. This is a written document which sets out the terms of the surrender. Implied surrender by conduct. (applies to your position) You can move out of the property you leased, simply hand your keys back and the lease will come to an end, but only if the landlord agrees to accept your surrender. Many tenants have thought they can simply post the keys through the landlord's letter box and the lease is ended. This is not true and without a document from the landlord, not only do you not know if the landlord has accepted the surrender, you also do not know on what basis they have accepted and could find they sue you for rent arrears, service charge arrears, damage to the property and compensation for your attempt to leave the property without the landlord's agreement. Unless you are absolutely certain that the landlord is agreeable to your departure, you should not attempt to imply a surrender by relying on your and the landlord's conduct.  
  • 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

Still No CCA from Marlin now Resolvecall letter.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4582 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

Despite Marlin issuing a stat demand in Jan 09 and me subsequently winning my set aside in march the same year after CCA requesting Marlin who Still haven't complied with my request it would appear they have now enlisted Resolvecall to try and threaten me.

 

RE: YOUR ABOVE OUTSTANDING ACCOUNT

 

We are acting on behalf of Marlin Financial Services who are the collecting agent for your above creditor(none listed above) We have been instructed by them to arrange a personal visit to your home by one of our representatives unless you contact Marlin Financial Services to address your account. This is because you are not making payments to your account and have failed to make contact with Marlin Financial Services despite their requests for you to get in touch.

 

It is in your interests to contact Marlin Financial Services iimmediately upon receipt of this letter to discuss your account as a matter of urgency. Failure to do so will lead to a personal visit being made by one of our representatives to your home to discuss your account and payment proposals.

 

PLEASE DO NOT IGNORE THIS LETTER. ACT NOW TO HAVE A POSITIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT YOUR ACCOUNT.

 

WHAT NOW???????????????????

Edited by tronny
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi tronny

 

Given your sucessful set aside and the on going CCA failure I think we can safely say that the account is in dispute :-)

 

Have a read of this letter from the Library . . http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?426-A-letter-when-the-account-has-been-passed-to-another-debt-collection-agency

 

Amend it to suit your circumstances including a mention of the set aside, send it to Resolvecall and let them get on with it

 

This is just my opinion and I'm sure that CAGGERS with more experience of this sort of situation will give more/better options

 

Good luck

 

R

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] I asked them to wait whilst I got my Bank card :violin:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Information that may help if a CCA request is refused due to the lack of a signature . . http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?248863-Signature-demands-fight-back-possible-!&highlight=

Link to post
Share on other sites

SORREEE... just realised it’s an SD, not a court claim.

 

(I’m a menace to society so I can’t edit my own posts... have asked a mod to edit)

 

SOOO... yes, letter to Resolvecall, copied to Marlin, stating the fact that as a valid CCA request remains outstanding, the account remains in dispute.

 

Copy your correspondence to the OFT.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And remember, they CANNOT take enforcement action while in default of a valid CCA request (as per pt2537’s Kotecha case). I note that in their letter they have carefully fallen short of threatening legal action so I believe they know exactly what they are doing –*no admin error here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A short history of this case for your info donkey, although a historic thread will exist somewhere within this site referring to the original post.

 

This was an HFC/MARBLES credit card which was referred to Restons and payments were being made monthly towards it without fail. Then all of a sudden I try to pay Restons and they tell me over the phone they are no longer handling this debt and someone would probably contact me and I should be paying them. This somebody was Marlin and when I spoke to them they wanted more than double what I was paying and wouldn't budge. I then CCA'd Marlin and there reply was to issue a Stat Demand for the outstanding amount which I subsequently applied to have set aside filing my defence with the court and attending on the hearing date only to find Mortimer Clarke for Marlin didn't bother to turn up and upon reading my evidence the judge set the stat demand aside. Then despite my request still not being complied with Marlin continually rang to speak to me which I always refused their request telling to fulfill my request and I would speak to them which of course hasn't happened culminating in the letter from resolvecall today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Donkey, you are getting confused between a set aside to a SD and a set aside to a CCJ awarded when there has been some error in the service of the CCJ documents.

 

Once the SD has been set aside that is the end of it because the claimant cannot proceed and issue a bankrupcy petition, nor can they issue another SD, as this would be an abuse of process.

 

I would ignore them, however if you want to get into correspondence simply write bak and point out that this matter has been considered by the court on XXX date and that Marlin lost, then suggest that they return the file to their client. I wouldn't tell them that it was an SD or go into any details, they should have all the info' to hand if they want to chase/ harrass you.

 

Martin g

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Donkey, you are getting confused between a set aside to a SD and a set aside to a CCJ awarded when there has been some error in the service of the CCJ documents.

 

Once the SD has been set aside that is the end of it because the claimant cannot proceed and issue a bankrupcy petition, nor can they issue another SD, as this would be an abuse of process.

 

I would ignore them, however if you want to get into correspondence simply write bak and point out that this matter has been considered by the court on XXX date and that Marlin lost, then suggest that they return the file to their client. I wouldn't tell them that it was an SD or go into any details, they should have all the info' to hand if they want to chase/ harrass you.

 

Martin g

 

Yes I know, I pointed it out myself! I misread the first post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looked at your original thread, and this was assigned to Phoenix Recoveries who tend to buy poor quality books of debt. Marlin are collecting for Phoenix, then. Who was the claimant on the original SD, out of interest? It should not have been Marlin – it should have been Phoenix!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looked at your original thread, and this was assigned to Phoenix Recoveries who tend to buy poor quality books of debt. Marlin are collecting for Phoenix, then. Who was the claimant on the original SD, out of interest? It should not have been Marlin – it should have been Phoenix!

 

Just to add to this, I am sure that I cannot recall a single instance where Phoenix have actually issued a notice of assignment.

 

So however far this goes down the line, even if it goes to court, you should have no problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well an update for this one.Received a hand delivered brown envelope which contained a resolvecall calling card for my urgent attention and telling me to contact their head office along in the normal post with a letter from Marlin or rather a Notice of assignment saying that MCE Portfolio Limited has had assigned to it all right, title, interes and benefit in my account.

 

Wat now???????????????

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would just ignore it, Resolvecall are about as much use collecting debts as I am at sewing.

Thinks the are part of Scotcall, they share the same address.

 

I by any chance one of their ' feild agents' does darken your doorstep, just tell them to leave at once.

The have no powers whatsoever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its been over two years since i cca requested them and set aside the sd they hit me with when i cca'd them i can't recall if i did send one. However they should be well aware of their non compliance or should i remind them??????

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...