Complain to the credit reference agencies (CRA) and the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO). One of my creditors tried that trick and I got the ICO to force them to correct it . First complain to the credit reference agencies, they wont do anything about it, but its good to let the ICO know that you have tried to reason with agencies. Here is a fragment of what I sent the CRA and ICO: I believe that the default and late markers registered amount to a material breach of the fourth Principle of The Data Protection Act 1998: 4. Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.

Background/Issues: Long story cut short, I signed Tomlin order (TO) in 2007 to pay Northern Rock (NRAM) £200 a month. I lost my job and my wife stopped the direct debit without tell me (truth be told it would have failed anyway). I tried to contact NRAM but they have a 0845 number and I didn't have the money to call them (sad but true). Missed about 3 payments and NRAM got judgement for balance based on a term in the schedule that they could get judgement and enforce etc. NRAM have interim charging order set to be made final @ hearing in April. Started working again and have a 15 min hearing to set aside CCJ/TO in May, my argument is based on the infamous default notice/termination issue. I am under no illusions as my research has shown that it seems impossible to have a court set aside a TO but nothing ventured nothing gained. My Contention: Default notice It is an established fact that an invalid default notice stops a lender from taking certain actions in McGuffick –v- The Royal Bank of Scotland plc [2009] EWHC 2386 (Comm) the court confirmed that obtaining judgement is against a debtor is enforcement as well as demanding early repayment or terminating the agreement. Tomlin order My argument here is that the compromise was based on a mutual mistake of fact/law – We only entered the agreement because we thought that NRAM was entitled to demand early repayment and terminate the agreement. “For a common mistake of fact or law to vitiate a contract of any kind, it must render the performance of the contract impossible” (The Great Peace [2002] EWCA Civ 14.) Questions: 1. Does the bad notice/termination stop the court from applying the term of the TO shown above i.e. that is giving judgment and charging order. 2. Bad default notices can be made good but in my case that would negate the TO and also the CCJ?

Thanks for the bumps!

Hi I just need second opinons about the enforceability of this agreement, if it is irredeemably unenforceable (no interest rate) as i think, can I get the default removed or because of the McGuffick v RBS ruling am i stuffed? Cahoot 1.jpg - Windows Live Cahoot 2.jpg - Windows Live Comments welcome.

I am always happy to help! I learnt the little I know from this great site.. loads of reading but the people here are great.

As far as I am aware only the claimant has to pay the allocation fee. Allocation Questionnaire - Consumer Wiki Litigation can be expensive if you lose, depending on the track that it is allocated to.

And so my friends it ends. I took Egg to court over the PPI and today we settled, I am not allowed to revel the terms of the settlement but I am reasonably happy. So in conclusion default removed, and all outstanding liabilites to egg settled. The link below has doc's related to the case: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/219582-egg-card-question.html B e_inspired

Sorry to hear about this Charlick but chin up, chest out and continue the good fight you will win in the end, also thanks for sharing. I am about to deal with BC and your insights will prove extremely useful.

Here is their defence: Scanned defence - Bits Deleted.pdf - Windows Live and my reply: Reply to defence - Bits Deleted.pdf - Windows Live Any questions or comments always welcome. B e_inspired.

I would complain to the FOS, its free and you may get your money back. Please have a look at http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/payment-protection-insurance-ppi/165672-egg-ppi-loan-credit.html B e_inspired.

Thanks. The egg card has already been paid off . It was converted into an egg loan (we recently reached a settlement agreement on the egg loan on day of hearing ). So s59 would be v. good for me I think? £14,950 - Card Limit (Cleared by loan) £8,559.26 - Amount I have paid I know its a bit complex, but if you could let me know what I didn't explain properly I will give it another go.

Ok, so I am still working on my case going through everything was a fine tooth comb, I feel like a CSI agent and what do I find.... first let’s look at the facts according to the evidence so far provided: 1. I apparently applied for 2 egg cards in a space of a ~month 2. Signed 2 agreements 1 in October 2002 ("A1") the other in November 2002 ("A2") 3. The agreements had interest free periods of 1 April and 2 May respectively. 4. In there defence egg aver that the agreement is "A1" i.e. signed in October 2002. 4. I found an old credit report that records the date the account was opened as sometime in November which ties in with "A2" 5. From my statements it would appear that they started charging interest from 1 April which ties in with "A1" Are you lost yet? no, good lets continue.. 6. "A1" has the old s59 chestnut i.e. "... only binding on us when we have completed and are satisfied with our final checks and other searches and you have..." 7. "A2" has different wording "...only binding on us when we have completed our final checks and you have..." so escapes s59 in my view. 8. I have documentation from egg showing that "A1" did not have PPI on the application. 9. I have documentation that shows that "A2" does have PPI on the application. The thing to keep in mind is that these agreements where supposedly made about a month apart (somehow I went back online after the first successful application and applied for another egg card and their online process allowed me to do this?) problem is I only ever had one egg card during this period and my statements back that up. So the 100 million euro question is which agreement is the valid agreement? "A1" or "A2"? If is "A1" then: 10. s59 comes into play as the agreement did not become binding on my signature, as can be seen from my credit report and statements it took a whole month to open the account (a whole month for them to complete their checks and be satisfied with them). If this is the case then the next problem here may be the statue of limitations, but I think because the agreement would be void according to s59, they would have to pay all the money I paid under the mistaken belief that there was a contract. The other problem may be latches but correct me if I am wrong but that defence wouldn't even come into the picture? This point is a very serious one and could have huge implications for egg if it was found to be the case as the egg card was turned into an egg loan. 11. I have documentation from egg that show PPI was not requested for "A1". If is "A2" then: 12. The interest free period was wrong as they started charging in April instead of May as per the terms of "A2". I don't really know the implications of this one yet, it’s clearly a serious breach of contract, but the problem is the contract was converted into a loan i.e. completed. If they knew about it, and didn't correct it, could it be fraud? Limitations and latches also apply but if they didn't spot it how the hell was I supposed to? 13. I am almost 100% sure that the PPI was pre-selected, anyway why would I change my mind about PPI from "A1" to the time when "A2" was made, don't think so. If you read through my brain dump thanks. If you have any views or questions on this I would like to hear it. I would rather sound stupid here than in front of a judge. Thanks again. B e_inspired.

Beachy, that is fast . Can I ask when your agreement was taken out? what shows that the 'real time' screen shot relates to YOUR application? How do you know that the PPI was not preselected? (unless of course you remember ticking it?) I have a claim against egg in court for PPI mis-selling and they have never produced a single screen shot of the application process, just Application Review (AR) pages, that they claim was captured at the time of the application. Would you mind posting the screen shot(s) minus and private information?

Well done, can I ask what year your agreement was? Did the FOS say it was missold because the PPI was pre-selected online? I have court case and and it hinges on the pre-selection of the PPI online. Thanks.

Thanks. I don't think I am explaining myself properly. As part of my SAR I got what egg calls application review (AR) pages as well as the egg credit card CCA's, I need to tie the agreement to the AR pages received. In the images I have linked to I have removed the 6 digits in the middle, so the reference number (REF) would be 10 digits. When egg opens the account, it seems to me that the account number is made up of 6 digits and then the 10 digit REF used in sort of a reverse order i.e if card/account no. is 123456 100 123456 3 then the REF on the agreement would be 3 123456 100. I hope that makes sense.