Mackenzie have responded!! - Bad News?

DarkConvict

fermi wrote: »

I'm not saying don't try that, but I just suspect it may be a case of head & brick wall. :wall:

This is not the first time that they have shown themselves to be biased.

Who knows though?

I actually expected that to be your response, ive never had to deal with the FOS. Although they seem better at awarding compensation and dealing with stuff than the OFT.

needuradvice

I hope you guys are not gonna mind me posting on here as well as CAG website. On the recommendation of one of CAG members (silverfox), I looked at my credit file which i obtained in july 2009 (saved on pc since then) and noticed the following:-


Even though silverfox has reassured me:-

I would suggest that the "settled on" date is when the debt was sold to the DCA. You would have been defaulted before that date.

I would get an up to date copy of your credit report just to see what (if anything) has been added.

Usually when a defaulted debt is sold, the new owner of the debt places their name in place of the original creditor.

Even if the default was May 04, you would not have paid since at least Feb 04 hence our opinion of statute barred

Could anyone echo silverfox's opinion? Is the date that i need to look at before the settled date on the credit file?

DVardysShadow

needuradvice wrote: »

I hope you guys are not gonna mind me posting on here as well as CAG website. On the recommendation of one of CAG members (silverfox), I looked at my credit file which i obtained in july 2009 (saved on pc since then) and noticed the following ....

Could anyone echo silverfox's opinion? Is the date that i need to look at before the settled date on the credit file?

You only now need to look back to 12 April 2004. Is it worth the bother? Just sweat it to 24 May and it has gone away.

GeorgeUK

Hi again.

Completely agree with what folks have written here and that the FOS are talking out of their behinds. If i was still a betting man i would wager they did not put this in writing. Even if they did, without reference to any legal quotes i wouldn't even use it to wipe my !!!!!!!

The debt would only still be enforcable if you had stopped them from enforcing the debt. They could have enforced the debt by taking out a CCJ - this didn't happen and they could have done so. They chose not to enforce the debt.

If they were to try to get a CCJ now, they would need to prove their case - it would not be up to you to disprove it. Can they provide proof that the debt is not statute barred? If they could they would already have sent a copy of it to you.

I say try not to sweat it too much as the SB date has absolutely nothing to do with a date on the credit file. It is to do with the actual date payments stopped being made to the account.

DVardysShadow

GeorgeUK wrote: »

I say try not to sweat it too much as the SB date has absolutely nothing to do with a date on the credit file. It is to do with the actual date payments stopped being made to the account.

Agree, although the date on the credit file is the most tangible date available.

fermi

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Agree, although the date on the credit file is the most tangible date available.

But meaningless all the same when it comes to debts being statute barred.

It's only the likes of MH that are looking to con/mislead people that try to insist otherwise. (Or ignorant FOS employees ).

At the best the date on file here is when the debt was sold. Although why no default was recorded with/before it is a bit odd.

In the unlikely event of court action, if defended MH could be required to stump up proof or any last payment/acknowledgement.

Their insistence on relying on false interpretations of the law in that regard strongly suggests that they know they would be 'stuffed' if put to such proof. Better for them to try and mislead someone over the SB status of the debt in the hope that they just pay up.

needuradvice

well thank u very much for ur help and support guys. Now i guess i only need to wait to see what the outcome of this case is going to be. Would it worth contacting the assigned adjudicator and telling him that he's wrong or should i wait and see? just don't want him to get p**sed off with me for correcting him.

DarkConvict

CAG posted that the FOS take no notice of the limitation act, so i don't know if it would even be worth while, as fermi said

I'm not saying don't try that, but I just suspect it may be a case of head & brick wall.

This is not the first time that they have shown themselves to be biased.

Try it if you like.

GeorgeUK

If you are going to do a letter to him, it may be best to give substance to your argument by quoting legislation at them, then ask that if they disagree with anything you have written that they provide supporting evidence for their argument.

They don't need to do this but hopefully it'll show them that you're not just going to be fobbed off and may hopefully put a little thought into any reply as it will be in writing rather than over the phone this time.

Let us know if you need any help with this.

needuradvice

i've got his direct number, so it might be quicker if i simply call him.