OFT imposes requirements on Mackenzie Hall to improve handling of disputed debts

Broken_hearted

I vote for Halifax and Blair Oliver Scott next

blind-as-a-bat_2

Broken_hearted wrote: »

I vote for Halifax and Blair Oliver Scott next

My sites are a bit higher, i want LTSB :mad:

And this report just adds to my ammo to reach that goal, in theory at least;)

fermi

I'd quite like to see Mercers brought to heal.

mr.ton

Excellent news.
Lets hope the OFT keeps a careful eye on them!

blueforyou

This is an attempt at a Template letter following the recent MH ruling. We also need an OFT one, too.....
DCA address

Date



Dear Sir / Madam

I do not acknowledge any debt to your company

Ref:

Regarding your letter / phonecall / other communication regarding the above alleged debt.

On dd/mm/yyyy I made a request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Sections 77−79) for a copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement that details the necessary information appertaining to the alleged debt.

You have failed to provide this document in the necessary timescale / amount of detail.

A recent ruling by the Office of Fair Trading against a certain debt collection agency, states that

• (the DCA) will not carry out Debt Collection Activity where it has been informed, in writing, that there is reasonable cause to believe that
the debt is in dispute.

• A debt is considered as in dispute where:
A request under section 77 or 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 has not been complied with, and this prevents the agreement being enforced without the permission of the court;

Given this ruling, I have today informed the OFT of your actions.

Please do not contact me by any means until you have provided the required documentation regarding this alleged debt.

Name

(DO NOT SIGN)

blind-as-a-bat_2

I would add the link to the PDF file on the net, just so they can see it for themselves, i would include the 1st credit one too:D

Sol00

fermi wrote: »

To add from the notes of the above:

5. The fact that requirements have been imposed on Mackenzie Hall appears on the consumer credit register. We will monitor Mackenzie Hall's compliance with the requirements.


Any complaints about non-compliance should be sent to:

Enquiries
Office of Fair Trading
Fleetbank House
2-6 Salisbury Square
London
EC4Y 8JX

Email: [EMAIL="enquiries@oft.gsi.gov.uk"]Enquiries@oft.gsi.gov.uk[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="enquiries@oft.gsi.gov.uk"]
[/EMAIL]
6. Under the Limitation Act 1980, which applies to England and Wales, a debt is considered to be statute barred when no payments have been made against it or where it has not been acknowledged for six years. A statute barred debt cannot be legally recovered. Whilst the OFT accepts that the debt still exists, the OFT considers that it can be unfair to pursue the debt in the circumstances set out in our Debt Collection Guidance (pdf 116 kb). In Northern Ireland, statue barred debts are governed by the Limitation (Northern Ireland) Order 1989. In Scotland, statute barred debts are governed by the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 which states that the debt itself ceases to exist after five years providing that it has not been acknowledged and that no relevant claim against it has been made by the creditor.


7. The OFT's advice for those being pursued by debt collectors is: don't panic or ignore the problem, seek help and advice from your nearest Citizens Advice Bureau and contact those who you owe money to as soon as possible.

Thanks, I forgot it was 5 years in Scotland.

Sol00

I'd like to see Welcome Finance get a boot up the backside next! There's too many horror stories and complaints about them for it to last much longer.

poptart1_2

Fantastic news, lets have more of it ! please also ALWAYS report to OFFICE OF FAIR TRADING any harrasment, bullying or unfair treatment you suffer ,it is no good just grumbling on here to each other ! Power to the people.

rog2

fermi wrote: »

I'd quite like to see Mercers brought to heal.

I'd like to see the whole lot of them given a good rap over the knuckles - the vast majority of dcas, that we hear of on this board, have been blatantly ignoring not only the OFT guidelines, but also Legislation, for too long. They, and their 'trolls' have openly boasted that these are only 'guidelines' and that they can interpret them as they wish - even to the extent that they can choose whether or not to follow them. :mad: :mad:

I hope, sincerely, that the OFT 'crackdown' of these legalised vultures is not limited to just a few and that it will lead to a rigorously enforced policing of an 'industry' that has been infested by parasites for too long.