Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Mitigate Trace and Collect - Credit licence?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4452 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

I'm another one who is having fun with these muppets - I've been lurking for a while on here and have sent complaints off to OFT etc as detailed in other threads. I also sent MTC a formal complaint which I've heard nothing back from in writing - surprise surprise. I didn't copy it to CFO but I'm now thinking that might be a good idea.

 

What I was wondering though, is Mitigate Trace and Collect (NOT MT Collect, the letter I have is definitely from the full name) registered as part of CFO and does it have a credit licence? So are they allowed to chase me for the debt in the first place, or are they acting illegally?

 

I've started getting phone calls from them in the past couple of days which I've ignored, I also had the "PRE-REMOVAL" text which I ignored (thanks to this forum) and details of those have been passed to OFT etc. (I say "etc" because I can't remember the email addresses I sent the complaint to). Should I also report to OFT etc that I believe Mitigate Trace and Collect are acting illegally because they don't have the required license to chase this debt anyway, or have I missed something and they are now registered with whoever it is they need to be with (is it BCCA?)?

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm another one who is having fun with these muppets - I've been lurking for a while on here and have sent complaints off to OFT etc as detailed in other threads. I also sent MTC a formal complaint which I've heard nothing back from in writing - surprise surprise. I didn't copy it to CFO but I'm now thinking that might be a good idea.

 

It does seem that mitigate trace and collect don't hold a ccl there is no record of a licence under the name of mitigate trace and collect. They appear to share CFO's licence under the name of mt collect. The sharing of the licence breaches OFT guidance anyway. I don't think there is any re

 

What I was wondering though, is Mitigate Trace and Collect (NOT MT Collect, the letter I have is definitely from the full name) registered as part of CFO and does it have a credit licence? So are they allowed to chase me for the debt in the first place, or are they acting illegally?

 

I've started getting phone calls from them in the past couple of days which I've ignored, I also had the "PRE-REMOVAL" text which I ignored (thanks to this forum) and details of those have been passed to OFT etc. (I say "etc" because I can't remember the email addresses I sent the complaint to). Should I also report to OFT etc that I believe Mitigate Trace and Collect are acting illegally because they don't have the required license to chase this debt anyway, or have I missed something and they are now registered with whoever it is they need to be with (is it BCCA?)?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Mitigate trace and collect don't appear to have a consumer credit licence of their Own but are sharing CFO's under the name of MT collect. This breaches OFT guidance anyway. They probably wouldn't need to be registered with the BCCA but should have their own consumer credit licence. For a companie to be able to collect debts using ballifs they would also need to have the debt collecting catogorie on the licence witch CFO/MT collect doesn't have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...