Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just to clear it up, sorry I don't make sense sometimes. I have paid £4000 £1200 of that was suppose to clear the £1200 debt.   Meaning I have sent a extra £2800 on top of my normal mainternance money.   Thank you
    • Try CPR 31.15 Possibly but a party is not compelled to disclose any documents pre allocation
    • Hi, I shown my key worker a letter that was sent to me saying that I owe £1200, she setup a standing order around 2021, this was to pay back money I owed, with my mental health status I have had complex issues to deal with and I just simply forgot about this standing order so it has been running for about 3.5 years acording to my key worker, anyway I'm not worried about the money that was sent that I call a overpayment, it went towards supporting my child's household so I am just happy with that, I am a little sad that I am being told I still owe this £1200, I have sent bank statements over 3 years worth but they have not taken away this £1200 bill and still say I owe it   Thank you
    • She did try contacting EON in the early days of the debt but they refused to speak to her because she could not pass the security checks. She didn't know the answers on an account she hadn't opened?   I also saw this article recently which could be what has happended here: Debt collection agencies in the UK are using fair means or foul to link people to an address where an unpaid debt has been run up, sometimes years after they have moved out The Guardian Anna Tims Mon 22 Apr 2024 The letter from the debt collection agency arrived out of the blue, and it was intimidating. It informed Joshua Simpson* that he owed £2,212 to Octopus Energy, and accused him of ignoring previous requests to settle the bill. If he did not stump up within 14 days, he was told, further action would be taken to recover the money. Simpson checked his Octopus account – it was in credit. Then he noticed the address where the debt had been accrued between 2022 and 2023. It was his childhood home – which his family had sold 18 years previously. "Since I was only 16 when we left the property, I was astonished that they'd linked my name [to it]," he says. "The debt collection agency insisted I provide a tenancy agreement to prove how long I've lived at my current address. I couldn't, since we bought our home. "They are now actively pursuing me for this debt, causing me a huge amount of stress. We are about to remortgage, and if this debt prevents us switching to a better deal, we will face real financial hardship." Simpson had been sucked into the shadowy world of "identity tracing", whereby investigators recruited by creditors seek to locate individuals who have moved home without paying their bills. It is an unregulated sector where anyone can set up as an agent in a back room without a licence, or scrutiny, and use fair means or foul to identify debtors. Reputable companies join a trade association that operates a code of practice, but membership is not mandatory, and mistakes are common. Last year, a teenage boy was chased for a debt of more than £900 by debt collectors acting for the energy company Ovo. A "trace agent" had somehow linked him to the debt because his parents had previously rented the property in question. An investigation by the Observer established that the debt had been run up by a subsequent tenant. The consequences of mistaken identity can be catastrophic. Individuals who are erroneously linked to a debt face, at worst, court action, bailiffs and a ruined credit rating. At best, they can endure weeks of stress and paperwork in order to prove they are not the debtor. It is estimated that 20m identity traces are made in the UK every year, many on behalf of companies that are owed money. Personal data is often obtained from credit reference agencies, which record applications for credit, and details are supposed to be verified with several different sources before being used for debt enforcement. In practice, however, this does not always happen. Simpson's details had been passed along a chain of intermediaries before the demand was issued. Octopus had given the unpaid account to a debt collection agent, which had contracted a tracing service, GBG, to find the debtor................ Full Article: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/04/a-cry-for-help-energy-providers-play-the-villain-in-dramas-to-chill-the-blood ..............The Financial Ombudsman Service, which investigates complaints about financial firms, states that debt collection agents have to produce convincing evidence to link an individual to a debt, rather than rely on names, addresses and birth dates. According to the trade association, the Institute of Professional Investigators, an unknown number of investigators and trace agents are operating below the radar. Many more are merely inept, as data protection compliance training is not mandatory. "We have been campaigning for many, many years to try to get all private investigators regulated," says secretary general Glyn Evans.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

Debenhams/Santander Cards-Viking Collection Services LTD


Nicola85
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5054 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

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ignore Viking and them telling you they want all or nothing, that is an unlawful request, and they will never admit to saying that in front of a judge!

 

If all you can manage to pay them, is the token payment of £1 a month, then do that, until such time that you are able to post up a clearer image of the agreement they sent you.

 

All you need is their bank details and you can set up a standing order, DO NOT set up a Direct Debit with them under any circumstances.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Images are just the front of the agreement. The right to cancel box is contained within the terms and conditions which were sent seperate from the agreement. The CAA I was sent was an A4 piece of paper with a 4x5 inch copy of the agreement. The back of the A4 piece of paper was blank and the terms and conditions for it were sent out seperate so I have no idea if they are the right ones for this agreement.

 

Is it still enforceable without the pescribed terms i.e repayments? Or are they allowed to put them in the terms and conditions?

 

I have been sent loads of documents by the DCA. They just say the usual like this debt isint going to go away so pay us the money you owe us and if I don't they will take me to court etc.

Edited by Nicola85
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mean to be a pain but I would really like to move on with this. Is there someone who can tell me If my agreement is legally enforceable in court? It would really help so I can get started on the best course of action.

 

The agreement I recieved was a Microfiche.

 

The terms and conditions sent seperate from the agreement are current and not those used when I signed the agreement.

 

The 'right to cancel' box and the repayments are contained within the terms and conditions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the face of things, what they have produced could be seen as enforceable. However if it went to court you could bring them to 'Strict Proof' where they would have to produce the original agreement... not a microfilche copy.

 

If the T&Cs they have supplied do not pertain to the CCA at its inception then it makes the CCA unenforceable. Send Viking this & see what their response is;

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

This account is in Dispute .

 

On xx/xx/2009 I wrote to xxxxxxxxx requesting that xxxxxxx supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account.

In response to this request I was supplied a mere application form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain any of the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553 for the definition of what is required. Suffice to say none of the terms are present in the document

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974, which states

 

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

 

This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I refer to page 5 of the guidance which states;

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment.

 

I require you to produce a compliant copy of my credit agreement to confirm I am liable to you or any organisation, which you represent for this alleged debt, if you cannot do so I require written clarification that this is the case. Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40

 

Since the agreement is unenforceable, it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for your client to write the debt off. I suggest you give serious consideration to this as any attempt of litigation will be vigorously defended and I will counter claim for all quantifiable damages

 

I respectfully request a response to this letter in 14 days

 

 

I trust this out lines the situation

Print name do not sign

Link to post
Share on other sites

I recieved a letter on Monday from Viking stating that it was more than likely that since they can't get payment from me they would be passing back my account back to Santander cards who will probably take legal action. Is there anything I should do? Should I start to worry yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No nothing at all to worry about, wait until the OC starts sending you correspondence then take it from there.

 

What they are saying, when you read between the lines, is that they have no evidence to legally extort money from you, so will off load this lemon back to the idiots that sold it...

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Bazooka Boo. Is this what happens with most peoples debts? Debt Collector buy the debt from Original Creditor then the Debt Collector finds that they have no legal evidence to take money from people so they sell it back to the Original Creditor? How often does the Original Creditor persue legal action? Just thinking that if a Debt Collector has not got enough evidence then it's not very likley that the Original Creditor will have any more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How often does the Original Creditor pursue legal action? Just thinking that if a Debt Collector has not got enough evidence then it's not very likely that the Original Creditor will have any more.

 

What normally happens is the the OC will use their own in-house collection agency first, for instance if you ran up a debt with the Halifax:D then you can expect to get letters from Blair Oliver & Scott, which is an acronym for Bank Of Scotland. Hence Halifax using their own in-house DCA.

 

Then to off load these 'Bad' debts, they will sell them in 'bulk' to other DCA's for a knock down price, and has been reported, for as little as 6p in the pound!

This then frees up the OC from having this Bad debt around their necks, and the rest of the money they are still owed is paid for by their insurance, so they don't lose anything.

 

The DCA who has bought your £1000 debt for say £160 will tell you that you owe them £1000, but are able to offer you a once in a lifetime offer to pay the debt off and can reduce that amount to say £800, this is how these companies make their profits and a why they are able to remain in business.

 

So rest assured that asking for the CCA, and then being told by that DCA that they have sent your file back to the OC is clarification that they bought your debt in bulk and have not been given the full file on your account.

 

And if they 'close' their files, it is safe to say that there is no such agreement and it will go quiet for a while, until such time as the OC flogs it on again to another DCA.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Today I recieved court papers. I'm not quite sure what to do. I know that I have to either deny or accept that I owe the debt. The problem I have is that YES I do owe the debt but I have no money in which to pay it with. If I accept that I owe the debt then I'll recieve a CCJ and I have no money to pay the CCJ. If I deny the debt then it's more than likely they can prove I owe them money and I'll still end up with a CCJ. I was never trying to get out of paying my debt. I just hit a bad financial patch and then things sarted to go down hill from there. I've tried talking to theese people and come to some sort of a payment arrangement but I'm not getting anywhere. Is there anyone who can give me some advice? Thanks so much. Nicola.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you kept all correspondence relating to your payment proposals?

 

If you have stated to them that you will pay X amount per month/week and they have refused then, they will not have a leg to stand on in court, the judge will simply tell them that all they will get from now on is the amount you stated that you could afford, and if thats £1 a week, then tough on them.

 

Is it an SD you have received? If so you have 14 days in which to acknowledge it, and you can even do it online, so are able to take it right up to the 11th hour.

 

It's a shame you can't post it up for Cerbs to have a look at, does it refer to the document as a Statutory Demand?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I can tell, it's a Claim form and a response pack. I'm suppost to fill in one of the two forms. One is to deny the other to accept. From what I can tell they are real papers they have been stamped by the court and it has a reference number. It's not a statutory demand.

 

What I really would like to ask is can I be issued with a CCJ if I don't have a wage and I don't owne a home or car?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I'll just fill in the form and say I accept the debt. I can't fill in the one to deny as I have no defence as Yes I do owe the debt. So I'll just fill it in and tell them I have no wages and I don't have any outgoings and see what happens from there as they are never going to get any money out of me I have none and I doubt I'll have any for the forseable future. They can't take what I have not got.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read through your thread and can't see any reply re default notice? Have you had one? Also, an assignment? Does it refer to these docs in the court claim? If so, you need to see them.

I'm going through a similar case. I sent a CPR request to the solicitors who came back with ...'don't have in their possession, are in process of retrieving...etc'. Then go on to give me extra time...etc!!! Do NOT fall for this. They try to get a CCJ by default.

 

Please try to find the strength to defend yourself. You've nothing to lose. Ask to see all docs they refer to now and file an embarrassed defence in the meantime. Online is very straightforward. Then it's up to them to prove they have a legitimate claim.

Good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it might be wise to send them a CPR request, I understand that you admit you owe this money but I would still defend, as you really have nothing to lose, I owe circa 55K and even though I do know I owe that money, I will defend myself at every turn.

 

If you need expert help quickly, then you can always click on the Red triangle to get the site teams attention and help.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...