Jump to content
We are now - The National Consumer Service ×


  • Tweets

    No tweets were found.

  • Posts

    • stayed. dead at present. if it remains that way for months then could cost the claimant £100's more in fees to lift the stay. dx  
    • The only thing that could be a problem is the PO Box, I sent the letter to the address without the PO Box, the reply I received didn't mention the LOC just a follow up to my first complaint email. What I might do is resend the SAR to the PO Box as well so they can't say they haven't received it.
    • No problem about establishing a breach of contract and on the basis they have said that it was a computer error, no problem about establishing inaccurate data processing.  Probably worth waiting until the SAR just to see what it brings and any more evidence.  So, if they failed to make the disclosure by the 30-day time limit then that gives you an extra basis for an action . You could start the action now or you could wait until 30 days. I suggest that you wait. I suggest that you make a diary note for 31 days  
    • Thank you They have initiated a refund of the £56 for the trip (which still hasn't been credited). This is all they are prepared to offer plus a £100 voucher for use on their experiences (which we don't want) This still leaves us out of pocket for the parking £15.35, and the 2 x Dart charge £5. As well as the travel to Southend instead of the Queenborough. The extra travel was in total 3.5 hours. I have spent around 2 hours writing letters, email etc. The tickets were purchased for myself and my wife. We haven't received anything from the SAR at the moment. In their email they have admitted an 'admin  error' so would that count as a breach of contract? So in total  Tickets: £56 Parking: £15.36 Dart Charge: £5 Distress & Travel: £150 Total: £226.36 Minus refund being processed of £56 leaves: £170.36 The refund of the tickets has now been credited to my credit card.
    • First draft of my snotty letter to BW Legal. I've got more up my sleeve but might save it for the next one! Dear Sean and Rachael, Thankyou for your “Letter of Claim” which you, somewhat optimistically, sent me on 24th June 2025 on behalf of your client “Premier Park Ltd.” It's baffling that such a reputable law firm with as many as 1.1 stars on Trustpilot would bother trying to extract money resulting from an entirely bogus and spurious claim. Had you even taken 5 minutes to assess the case you would have noticed it contains more holes than a Swiss cheese, but since in last year's accounts you state that you are instructed on a high-volume basis, I doubt any due diligence was performed before blindly sending me your template letter. Consequently, should you choose to pursue your claim in Court having been informed of its futility, I will be asking the court for an unreasonable costs order under CPR 27.14(2)(g). However, I would like to extend my thanks to you both for an insight into your business practices. I bet when you were studying for your law degree you never saw yourself aged 51 running a bottom-feeding law firm. I have used your company as an example to my children of what happens if you don't work hard enough at school and I'm pleased to say their work rate has significantly improved in the last few weeks of term. Please cease and desist from contacting me any further on this matter. Yours sincerely,
  • 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
      • 162 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
        • Thanks
        • Like

Recommended Posts

As a follow up to my thread: "Receiving threats from Moorcroft on behalf of Virgin Media" (New member - I can't post links yet!)

I have just received a letter from Midas Legal Services which reads as follows:

 

Dear XXXX

 

Re: VIRGIN MEDIA Balance £34.30

 

 

LITIGATION WARNING

 

We are part of the Moorcroft Group and are aware that you have failed to reach a repayment agreement with Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd concerning the above account. We are now reviewing the account prior to the possible recommending of legal action by external solicitors acting on behalf of our clients.

 

To prevent possible further action you must contact Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited at the following address.

 

Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited

P.O. Box 17

Moorcroft House

2 Spring Gardens

Stockport

SK1 4AJ

 

Telephone Number: 0161 475 2810

Fax Number: 0161 477 3864

 

Failure to contact Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited by the 25/02/11 may result in the issue of legal proceedings without further notice.

 

Yours sincerely

Mr. X XXXX

Litigation Manager

 

 

 

 

Any words of advice / encouragement? I know the letter looks about as flimsy as a wet paper bag but do you think these clowns will actually man up and issue proceedings? I've already missed the payment date anyway since they send all the letters to the wrong address and it takes time for them to be forwarded..... So I guess I'll find out one way or the other in the not too distant future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As Midas are part of the Moorcroft group, I think it would be better if this post was merged with the other thread unless there is good reason not to. Can you let us know

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I didn't want to bump a dead thread. And also a letter from legal services is pretty scary to someone like me, I'm not yet an experienced CAGGER!

I really want some help on this matter as I'm fairly intimidated to be honest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,

As I see it, Midas is threatening you, not promising that they will go to court. This is just another tool in their arsenal to intimidate- and they are succeeding!

 

As you wish this kept here, this is the link to your other thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?294113-Receiving-threats-from-Moorcroft-on-behalf-of-Virgin-Media-Please-Help

 

I'll have a read and come back

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as I see it, you should be making a written complaint to VM outlining what you put on the other thread.

 

Your choice of what to do about Moorcroft/Midas. My option is to send a 'Prove it' letter

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?609-Can-t-find-the-letter-you-want-Look-here

 

In the meantime, check your credit file just to make sure they haven't placed a default there and if they have, we could help get that off

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice.

 

There's nothing on my credit report, and I will write a complaint to VM when I get home.

 

I'm loath to write to Moorcroft as they don't know my address (they don't even spell my name properly) and I would like to keep it that way. I'm wondering if it ever went any further I could just deny all knowledge of their threats since it's all going to my mother's address and there's no way they can prove she forwarded anything to me...

Link to post
Share on other sites

See below for info on Midas "so called" Legal!

 

Re: Morgan Stanley/Barclaycard - is this enforceable please?

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by
Desperate Daniella
viewpost-right.png

You are supposed to be shaking with terror because the letterheading includes the word 'legal'.

 

As they are new you might as well send them the standard sod off letter and you can also ask them why Moorcroft is now calling itself Midas Legal Services.
:lol:

 

 

 

Thank you DD,

Re. Midas Legal, I've just had a look at these clowns! They are a dormant company so if anyone receives a threatening letter you know what to tell them!

Alternatively, you can find their one registered director at one of the following;

NEIL GEORGE MCROBERTS

MOORCROFT FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED

MOORCROFT DEBT RECOVERY LIMITED

MOORCROFT INVESTIGATION SERVICES LIMITED

MOORCROFT COMPUTER SERVICES LIMITED

MOORCROFT GROUP PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY

ROMILEY GOLF CLUB LIMITED

 

I may visit the idiot at the golf club and stuff his letter in an appropriate place!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have had this very problem with Moorcroft. I first told Virgin that I wasn't paying the bill as it was miss sold to me. They told me that I would have to pay the rest of my contract which I refused to do. They told me to write a letter to there head office stating my dispute which I did with no reply. I called them and at the beginning of the conversation they told me they had on record that they had received my letter I then got passed around form pillar to post and they said I had to write again to the head office. I told them I had already done this with no reply. they then told me that I could email which I did and they emailed back say ing they couldn't deal with it and I had to write to head office!!

 

Then the moorcroft letters started. I spoke to them and they said that I needed to attached all the info the my account and they would put it in dispute. I did this and then after a while they sent more letters. I called them yesterday and offered them half to settle. They refused it and said it would have to be the full amount so I said no. the guy on the phone said it would go to court and I would have to pay £150 court costs so which is double what I owe so I should just pay the debt now (which I found very pushy!). I refused and said I would fight the court action.

 

I am worried now and I want to just clear the debt but after reading these thread am reluctant

 

Could someone please advise whether I should just pay or keep fighting it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Avonia - Virgin Media are completely incompetent, I wouldn't waste your time trying to get through to them. As for Moorcroft they are the lowest of the low. I think you might have made a mistake by phoning them at all, as now they will think they have you on the hook.

 

Personally I haven't responded to a single one of their letters, and the latest one I got is showing them getting a bit desperate. Basically it says I've been passed on to their 'home collections' department. However the previous letter said that failure to pay will result in immediate legal action so the fact that they have now added another step to the process is just proof that they're bluffing. Although I was worried by the first couple of letters, I'm now 99% sure that they're nothing more than hot air. Let's face it they would never take legal action for £30 (which I don't even owe them) because as a small claim they would have to cover their own legal costs.

 

Your debt of £150 is obviously higher than mine and it sounds like because you left a contract they might actually have grounds to prove the debt in court. But I highly doubt that they would take it further than threatening letters because of the fact that their legal costs would be higher than the £150 they would get from you if they won.

 

My advice would be to completely ignore Moorcroft, it's working out OK for me so far. If you want to contact Virgin then keep trying but send all mail recorded delivery or they will ignore it. Also if you send mail recorded delivery you will have proof in case of the very tiny chance they take you to court, then your recorded letters will guarantee you win the case. Remember they're not allowed to chase a debt which is in dispute!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...