Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

[CD36]

Hi all,
My first post here, so hopefully it's in the right place. I'd appreciate any feedback on the following.
I disputed two credit card agreements with Bank of Scotland back in 2008, via a CCA request and SAR.
On both occasions they were unable to provide a credit agreement, and only sent an application form dated from 1998.
During the proceeding period I've had various DCAs attempt collection on these accounts, but they have all gone away once I disputed the alleged debts.
Recently I received letters from both HBOS/Lloyds Banking Group and Mackenzie Hall advising that they had transferred assignment to them, and ever since I received the usual threatograms from them.
This week I received a letters from Colemans CTTS advising they were representing Mackenzie Hall and that legal action may be taken if I don't respond within 7 days.
So far I've taken the view to ignore them, as I moved house over a year ago I assumed they were trawling, but should I continue to do that on the basis that they may take action, or should I blow my cover and contest, which potentially may give them more reason to pursue?
Any comments would be welcome.

[CD36]

Re: Mackenzie Hall Letter

ANY and ALL communication from Mucky Hall should be virulently IGNORED.
Responses just encourage yet more Bovine Excrement from the Kilmarnock Cowboys.

Mucky Hall specialise in totally unenforceable and statue barred debts.
They WILL claim otherwise, and make baseless threats including visits and legal action, but they are full of regurgitated hot air..
All in all the lowest of the low bottom feeders of the DCA industry..

This was the approach that I was taking but I've now received a letter from a solicitors (Colemans CTTS) acting on their behalf. Should they be ignored too?

[Curlyben]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

Yes you should.
7 days in NO way complies with Pre-action protocols and as ever they are using the wrong language.
Lots of mays and mights, not definites..

Their site paints a fuller picture and reminds me of other Solicitors-For-Hire
http://www.colemans-ctts.co.uk/debt-recovery/

[CD36]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

^
Thanks. I'll hold tight and see what happens.

[Curlyben]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

Have they threatened passing you to their Doorsteppers, Meritforce ??

[dogtired]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

subscribe

[CD36]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

Have they threatened passing you to their Doorsteppers, Meritforce ??

I think it was in one of their threatograms - not that it would concern me.

[CD36]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

Looking at this again, it's basically a letter from Colemans asking me to contact MH. The return address on the envelope is the same as MH, so it was probably generated by them too.
The 7 days has now expired so I guess I may be hearing from them again soon?

[Curlyben]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

That's what you get from template merchants like these.
There's a number around, used by various DCA's.
I've reported a few to the SRA, but little actually gets done about them.

[CD36]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

I just had a missed call on my mobile which apparently was from them. How do they know my number as I've never given it to any DCA?

[CD36]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

I've now had a letter from HL Legal stating that unless I respond within 14 days that they anticipate their client will take legal action. (The letter was dated 14th March)
Is this more bluff or are they getting serious?

[CleverClogs]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

It may be helpful to inform those shysters that their client could experience difficulty with enforcing alleged debts for which the original creditor had failed to satisfy a request made under s 78 (link) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

[CD36]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

I've been trying to take Curlyben's advice and not engage with them, as this will encourage them. I was curious to hear if they (HL Legal) are more likely to pursue legal action than Colemans, or are they another solicitor for hire?

[CleverClogs]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

They may be a little less constipated.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Mackenzie Hall/Colemans Solicitors

I've now had a letter from HL Legal stating that unless I respond within 14 days that they anticipate their client will take legal action. (The letter was dated 14th March)
Is this more bluff or are they getting serious?

It could be bluff because their website offers Letters Before Action by the dozen:http://www.hllclba.co.uk/costs.php ...and a Google search returns this text:

HL Legal & Collections is a UK commercial debt recovery and credit control service, which gives you immediate online access to Solicitors letters

Having said that, it doesn't hurt to treat solicitors letters as proper letters of claim or LBAs and respond accordingly, along these lines:

Dear Sirs

Re your letter dated xyz.

Thank you for your letter, the contents of which i have noted.

Since your letter clearly refers to the threat of litigation, i am treating it as a formal letter of claim albeit an entirely defective one.

I refer you to the Civil Procedure Rules pre action protocol practice direction, in particular Annex A and Annex B, you will note your letter fails spectacularly to comply with either of the aforesaid Annexes.

Since you are a firm of solicitors, i cannot excuse such failures and place you on notice that any litigation on the back of this letter will result in an immediate application to the Court requesting the matter stayed with costs against you and your client on the indemnity basis. I refer you to Para 4.6 of the Practice Direction which explains the consequences of non compliance with the Pre action protocol.

Turning to the subject matter of your letter, this matter is subject of a dispute which has been raised with your clients representatives and therefore it would be appropriate before you threaten litigation for your clients client to actively deal with the issues which i have raised.

The main crux of my dispute is .................................................. ......

Accordingly and in accordance with the CPR pre action protocol practice direction i look forward to your reply setting out correctly the nature of your clients claim and answering my dispute as stated above.

Regards

You need to edit it to suit your particular circumstances. The crux of you dispute would be that they have, so far, failed to provide you with a copy of your agreement and per post 1, and anything else that may be relevant, for example, if you didn't receive a NoA, etc. That should call their bluff! :grin: