Mackenzie have responded!! - Bad News?

GeorgeUK

Last in, but i agree with the others - it sounds like they didn't even bother reading the letter which is why they sent the reply to you rather than FOS. Let them ignore the FOS for a while then scramble to find anything that can prove the debt is owed when they discover their mistake in having p'd of the FOS.

The ball is still in their court and you can't really do anything but wait until proof is provided or the FOS agree with you and the debt is SB.

needuradvice

thanks george mate. I'll keep you uptodate as soon as i receive any further info.

take care

magpiecottage

Sorry - been off doing other things (whole village taking on council over school admissions, long story see here if you are interested)

Anyway, all going according to plan needuradvice. If they pass it to another agency and don't tell you that also breaches the rules, so if it happens pass a copy to FOS (scan and e-mail quoting FOS reference).

Let us know how you get on.

needuradvice

thanks magpie,

i know what u mean regarding school. Our school had 95 places available and over 600 applications. Thankfully we were the lucky ones and our choice got accepted.

I will keep u uptodate as soon as i know of anything else.

take care

Britwife

I just posted about this company on Friday. We're supposed to respond by tomorrow but my husband and I are too afraid to deal with them. I don't know what will happen if we ignore thier letter. It says we have to pay by tomorrow.

This debt isn't our and even if it was, it would be statute barred. I was given advice to send the prove it letter first. My worry is that they will do to us what they continue to do to you. I've never felt this way about a dca. Of all, we got MH.

I hope you get sorted, I just hope they can't take us to court.

needuradvice

hi britwife,

its a good thing u've come on this forum to ask us. I'm not anexpert, but i'm sure this is similar situation to mine. If u say that its already SB, then you have absolutely nothing to worry about. DO NOT CONTACT THESE IDIOTS AT ANY COST!!!

I doubt it very much they can do anything. Read through my notes and follow what others have adviced me. Although to be on the safe side, wait until an expert can confirm that i'm giving you the correct advice.

Take care and remember - do not contact them, unless an expert tells you on this forum.

magpiecottage

My template letter is on this thread., along with instructions.

needuradvice

thanks for that interesting link magpie...but now i'm worried :huh:.

I've noticed in the FOS's examples of cases dealt with that they state:-

"Arriving at a fair agreement for the repayment of a debt will always be a two-way street. The debt-collecting business must take a realistic and proportionate approach to the consumer’s proposals. Equally, the consumer must be willing to engage in the process and should not simply ignore reasonable requests to provide a proposal showing how they intend to repay the debt. In some of the complaints we see, difficulties have arisen (or escalated) because the consumer has been advised – inappropriately – not to communicate at all with the debt-collecting business.

Where we decide that a debt-collecting business has not dealt reasonably with a consumer, we will normally tell it to pay appropriate compensation as redress (and we may direct that this should be used to reduce the debt). However, we will not normally conclude that the debt should simply be written-off. In some cases we have found it difficult to achieve a prompt, fair settlement because the consumer’s representative has advised them to accept nothing less than a complete write-off of the debt.

Sometimes a consumer (or their representative) asks us to declare a debt legally unenforceable, on the grounds of some alleged legal technicality, even though there is no dispute over the size of the debt – and no complaint that the financial business has behaved at all unfairly. The law requires us to decide cases on the basis of what is fair and reasonable – and we are unlikely to decide it would be fair and reasonable to agree to such a request."


To me it seems FOS is trying to say that just because we have made no communication and we may legally have a SB debt, they still may not help us write it off. Am i right?

magpiecottage

needuradvice wrote: »

Arriving at a fair agreement for the repayment of a debt will always be a two-way street. The debt-collecting business must take a realistic and proportionate approach to the consumer’s proposals. Equally, the consumer must be willing to engage in the process and should not simply ignore reasonable requests to provide a proposal showing how they intend to repay the debt. In some of the complaints we see, difficulties have arisen (or escalated) because the consumer has been advised – inappropriately – not to communicate at all with the debt-collecting business.

If the debt exists (and is not statute barred) they expect you to pay it.

needuradvice wrote: »

Where we decide that a debt-collecting business has not dealt reasonably with a consumer, we will normally tell it to pay appropriate compensation as redress (and we may direct that this should be used to reduce the debt). However, we will not normally conclude that the debt should simply be written-off. In some cases we have found it difficult to achieve a prompt, fair settlement because the consumer’s representative has advised them to accept nothing less than a complete write-off of the debt.

They will not force a debt to be written off in full because something has not been done exactly according to the rules.

needuradvice wrote: »

Sometimes a consumer (or their representative) asks us to declare a debt legally unenforceable, on the grounds of some alleged legal technicality, even though there is no dispute over the size of the debt – and no complaint that the financial business has behaved at all unfairly. The law requires us to decide cases on the basis of what is fair and reasonable – and we are unlikely to decide it would be fair and reasonable to agree to such a request."

No - there have been reports of claims agencies trying this on debts that are not statute barred. Statute barring is not an alleged legal technicality, it is a recognised aspect of law.

needuradvice

well thank u magpie for clearing that misunderstanding up..phew! for a moment i thought i had messed up, AGAIN!

thank u