Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
    • he Fraser group own Robin park in Wigan. The CEO's email  is  [email protected]
    • Yes, it was, but in practice we've found time after time that judges will not rule against PPCs solely on the lack of PP.  They should - but they don't.  We include illegal signage in WSs, but more as a tactic to show the PPC up as spvis rather than in the hope that the judge will act on that one point alone. But sue them for what?  They haven't really done much apart from sending you stupid letters. Breach of GDPR?  It could be argued they knew you had Supremacy of Contact but it's a a long shot. Trespass to your vehicle?  I know someone on the Parking Prankster blog did that but it's one case out of thousands. Surely best to defy them and put the onus on them to sue you.  Make them carry the risk.  And if they finally do - smash them. If you want, I suppose you could have a laugh at the MA's expense.  Tell them about the criminality they have endorsed and give them 24 hours to have your tickets cancelled and have the signs removed - otherwise you will contact the council to start enforcement for breach of planning permission.
  • 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

Help needed MERITFORCE DOORSTEP COLLECTORS on their way


johneem0607
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4427 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

Cant seem to find the letter on here, stopping these people from visiting my property, if someone has the link I would be very greatful as my tired eyes cannt take much more.

 

if there is no link some tactics would be helpful

 

The company in question is MERITFORCE, Newcastle

cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you actually request a visit??

 

If not, just tell them to leave. There's nothing they can do. The threat of a visit is often just a threat - very few actually do turn up on your doorstep.

 

http://www.csa-uk.com/Documents/OFT%20debt%20collection%20-%20guidance%20only%20_July%202003.pdf

 

Take a look at this, and prepare yourself, just in case.

 

All the best.

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

THANKS VERY MUCH-

 

f. visiting or threatening to visit debtors without prior agreement when the

debt is deadlocked or disputed

 

I like this bit, I could use this one against them I think.

I am about to dispute this certain debt (along with a few others)

 

Cheers Again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Cant seem to find the letter on here, stopping these people from visiting my property, if someone has the link I would be very greatful as my tired eyes cannt take much more.

 

if there is no link some tactics would be helpful

 

The company in question is MERITFORCE, Newcastle

cheers

 

 

Hello johneem,

 

You could use this, and adapt it to suit! Depends how strong you want to word it!

 

I use it, and so far I have had no unwanted visitors!

 

 

Dear Sir

With reference to a card/letter received this morning from one of your "representatives". Ref: XXX. It will not be convenient for anybody from your organisation or anyone representing your organisation to call at any time. Therefore I insist that you terminate the intended callers visit week commencing XXXXXXXX 2007 and also any future date. If any person or persons do call after this notice it will be deemed harassment. Also any person or persons from your organisation or representatives of your organisation that do call and are present on any part of my property after this notice, they will be deemed to be trespassing and the police may be called and informed that a breach of the peace may occur. Reasonable force may be used to remove any such persons if necessary. I would also like to point out to you that any further letters or communication of this nature will be regarded as harassment and reported to all relevant authorities including the police.

 

 

 

Regards, Jeff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont worry they rarely call. If they do remember they have NO legal rights. Ask them to leave and if they fail a call to the Old Bill should encourage them. The number of times I have waited on these muppets

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont worry they rarely call. If they do remember they have NO legal rights. Ask them to leave and if they fail a call to the Old Bill should encourage them. The number of times I have waited on these muppets

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a section taken from a letter that I sent them, I would suggest that if time is of the essence for you it may be worth faxing them rather than using snail mail.

 

'Furthermore, please note that I am only prepared to communicate with you in writing. Should it be your intention as you have warned to arrange a “doorstep call”, please remember that there is only an implied license under English Common Law for certain people to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.).

 

Please therefore take note that, I revoke license under English Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so without my permission, you will then be liable to damages for a tort of trespass. You would also be conspiring in a trespass if you sent someone from a doorstop collection service company to visit me and should it be necessary, I will seek an injunction.'

 

Hope this helps

 

Switch

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember, they've got as much legal power as the kid who puts takeaway menus through your letterbox.

 

In the highly unlikely event that anybody does appear, don't answer the door to them.

 

Politely ask, through a letterbox or window, that they leave immediately. Should they refuse, call the police (get the number of your local station ready).

 

They've got no legal power of entry, and must conform to the OFT guidelines on debt collection eg not act in a threatening manner, not cause embarrassment or distress etc.

  • Barclays: WON!!! It took four months but was totally worth it!
  • Cabot: I'm still waiting for an enforcable agreement, more than a year after requesting it. Go on, Uncle Ken, take me to court if you dare. You know you want to!
  • Elephant.co.uk: VICTORY - they admitted there was no debt!
  • Ashbourne Management (gym membership): Finally got my default removed and out-of-court settlement; I'm not finished with them yet!

<--- If I've been helpful please remember the scales ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just noticed the date of the original post. I think the urgency of the situation may just have reduced slightly.... :p

  • Barclays: WON!!! It took four months but was totally worth it!
  • Cabot: I'm still waiting for an enforcable agreement, more than a year after requesting it. Go on, Uncle Ken, take me to court if you dare. You know you want to!
  • Elephant.co.uk: VICTORY - they admitted there was no debt!
  • Ashbourne Management (gym membership): Finally got my default removed and out-of-court settlement; I'm not finished with them yet!

<--- If I've been helpful please remember the scales ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Started getting threatening letters from Meritforce...ignoring them as I did when getting them from their masters Mackenzie Hall.

Debt is Statute Barred.

Had the usual "we are going to visit you" --yeah right.

Their latest tactic is to send another letter but this time besides my name and address in the envelope window , the reference number , pursuers and (alleged) amount are clearly visible without opening the envelope.

I have a feeling they are breaking codes of practice.Can someone put me straight on this.

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Started getting threatening letters from Meritforce...ignoring them as I did when getting them from their masters Mackenzie Hall.

Debt is Statute Barred.

Had the usual "we are going to visit you" --yeah right.

Their latest tactic is to send another letter but this time besides my name and address in the envelope window , the reference number , pursuers and (alleged) amount are clearly visible without opening the envelope.

I have a feeling they are breaking codes of practice.Can someone put me straight on this.

Thanks in advance.

You should welcome their doorstep collector so as you can tell him to his face to F*** OFF. Of course its the usual bullsh!t. Of course the chances of anyone calling to your door is nil.

 

I too have notciced the more desperate the scummy DCAs become the more information appears in the window of the envelope. Perhaps it should form part of your complaint against the muppets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Started getting threatening letters from Meritforce...ignoring them as I did when getting them from their masters Mackenzie Hall.

Debt is Statute Barred.

Had the usual "we are going to visit you" --yeah right.

Their latest tactic is to send another letter but this time besides my name and address in the envelope window , the reference number , pursuers and (alleged) amount are clearly visible without opening the envelope.

I have a feeling they are breaking codes of practice.Can someone put me straight on this.

Thanks in advance.

 

 

Hi Greywolf,

 

 

I think I would be inclined to take that letter complete with envelope, to my local Trading Standards. Let's see what they make of it.

 

 

Best wishes, Jeff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the OFT guidelines on fair practice:

 

 

Physical/psychological harassment

2.5 Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive.

 

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

j. acting in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor either

deliberately or through lack of care, for example, by not putting

correspondence in a sealed envelope and putting it through a letterbox,

thereby running the risk that it could be read by third parties.

 

I'd say that covers it. Definately a report to TS :)

 

  • Barclays: WON!!! It took four months but was totally worth it!
  • Cabot: I'm still waiting for an enforcable agreement, more than a year after requesting it. Go on, Uncle Ken, take me to court if you dare. You know you want to!
  • Elephant.co.uk: VICTORY - they admitted there was no debt!
  • Ashbourne Management (gym membership): Finally got my default removed and out-of-court settlement; I'm not finished with them yet!

<--- If I've been helpful please remember the scales ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

Hello to all you people having problems with meritforce first of all they are a bunch of EDIT who makes threats by letter or telephone my expeirence with them was about 2 months ago they sent me a letter on non headed paper saying mackenzie hall passed your debt to us regarding your credit card debt of 1200 pounds which i know i paid of my credit card debt 6 years ago and said i will never have one of those again anyway about meritforce and mackenzie hall i have told by a source of information they get you details from experian and also dun and bradsheet i also contacted kilmornock trading stadards they say we are aware of the problem and are well known to us and i was advised to shread the letters this debt of mine was made up by them which they pfish and make ones life a misery.

Edited by freakyleaky
Innapropriate remarks removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very bad advice from TS. The letters should not be shredded. They should be kept and an official complaint made to East Ayrshire Trading Standards and the OFT. The more complaints are made agains Mackenzie Hall the sooner they will lose their licence

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. everyone a correction in my letter i posted on the 5th of may 2008 i was to say as my debt was nearly 7 years old next month i have shreadded all letters relating to visa card services and i said to my wife we will not get another credit card and the trading stadards have investigated merit force for us and turns out to be a two bob outfit the officer said to me they have nothing on us they are pfishing and making telephone calls and sending unheaded letters to people saying they want money if people are silly to put up with this and pay i know for sure will not paying these EDIT as are debt was cleared and paid in full 7 years next month.

Edited by freakyleaky
Innapropriate remarks removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. everyone a correction in my letter i posted on the 5th of may 2008 i was to say as my debt was nearly 7 years old next month i have shreadded all letters relating to visa card services and i said to my wife we will not get another credit card and the trading stadards have investigated merit force for us and turns out to be a two bob outfit the officer said to me they have nothing on us they are pfishing and making telephone calls and sending unheaded letters to people saying they want money if people are silly to put up with this and pay i know for sure will not paying these W*****S as are debt was cleared and paid in full 7 years next month.

 

 

 

 

Hi,

 

 

If Trading Standards are aware of this bunch, why are they not doing anything about them!!?

 

 

Jeff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jeff i have contacted trading standards in kilmarnock mr stewart he says we have several complaints about mackenzie hall and merit force his advice is if you do not have a referance number ignore it and do not answer them when they telephone you if you have caller display are debt is 7 years old next week we do not owe any monies to anyone these (edit)are **** and phishing and B.T are keeping a track of all abusive calls made to us when my wife answers and GOOD LUCK.

Edited by freakyleaky
Innapropriate remarks removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are phoning you once you state that you are not paying a statute barred debt you can actually sue them in court for harrassment...this is what the OFT says... if you want termination on this SJ then write to them saying the debt is statute barred I am not paying anything towards it blah blah..

 

section 2.14 -

continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they

will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to

harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of

Justice Act 1970.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To. 42man as i said are debt is 7 years old next week these so called EDIT are pfishing and relying on peoples stupidity me and my wife have cleared are debt we just laugh at them when they call us if ever they come to my front door they are in for a surprise instore end.

Edited by freakyleaky
Innapropriate remarks removed
Link to post
Share on other sites

MIL Collections

 

Hi everyone I am new to this forum. For some time I have been receiving periodic letters from MacKenzie Hall saying I owe £300. I contacted them and wrote a letter based on one of the templates on here saying I considered it to be statute barred etc etc. Then I heard from them again a year later saying I still owed £300. This time I got one of the litigation solicitors where I work to contact them on my behalf. They told the solicitor they would send me details of my debt to me for me to look at but they never did. A couple of months later I heard from Meritforce saying they had been passed the debt by MacKenzie Hall and would send someone round in 10 days if I didn't pay it and if I still didn't pay after that they would take legal action. I ignored it and to my knowledge nobody called. That was roughly a month ago. I have just received a letter from MIL Collections who I have never heard of and can't find anything on the internet about, saying I now have 72 hours to pay the debt or someone will "attend my premises to establish my residencey and reason for non-payment" and that I musn't "underestimate the seriousness of this matter". I am now petrified that this time it's a real threat and that someone will come and take my possessions or that I may end up with loads of extra costs incurred. I also note that on the bottom of the letter it is says they are licensed by the Office of Fair Trading so I assume they have the right to do this. Does anyone have any advice?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The debt is Statute Barred so they cannot take you to court. As regards their threats of a home visit send them this

 

Dear Cretins

I refer to your recent correspondence.

I note it is your intention to arrange a “home collection visit”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make an appointment with you.

 

There is only an implied license under Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so, then you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and civil action will be taken.

Remember these clowns have NO LEGAL POWERS whatsoever. If they do appear at your home ORDER them to leave. Should they fail to do so report them to the Police.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...