Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Thought I would start this thread as I have had a number of different issue regarding the Coop covered elsewhere. So here goes.
Was in a payment plan with Coop who then got nasty demanding full payment etc early in the year. They then sent a default notice giving 14 days in total (no time for service). Arriving on the same day and dated the same was a termination notice! The notice was for the arrears only. Later they tried sending another termination notice, pity for them you can't terminate twice! They also tried adding a £60 fee after the alleged agreement was terminated.
I then made a CCA request. They sent an application form. The alleged T&C's that applied were barely legible.
So, with the help of BRW, I sent off a letter to them explaining the error of their ways and offering to settle the arrears for a speedy solution and cleaning my credit file. They did not reply and I have not heard from them for months.
However, a couple of months ago I find a default has been put on my credit file. Later I got a threatogram from Robinson Way asking for full payment. They even said I could pay by credit card. Nice of them but very naughty. Anyway, sent a letter referring them to the letter sent that I have not had a reply to. That was over a month ago and have heard nothing.
I then got an alert from Experian. I checked the alert and found that my account has been marked as settled. I assume that they have not given up but have sold on to DCA perhaps?
I have now sent off a letter back to Coop asking them to reply to my original letter and demanding removal of the default, pointing out the defective DN and relevant legislation why they should not have placed a default on my file. Doubt this will make any difference though.
Below are all the docs I have so far except for the RW demand. Can add this if needed.
I then got an alert from Experian. I checked the alert and found that my account has been marked as settled. I assume that they have not given up but have sold on to DCA perhaps?
Hello there lifeafterdebt. Have you really just struck extremely lucky?
How long ago did you receive the alert/check your file? What is the date your credit report is saying the account was settled on? (I understand you might not want to give the exact date, but are we talking a week ago, a month?) If it was recently I would suggest there may be a letter slowly crawling its way to you (you know how long some of their post seems to take).
As far as I am aware if a debt has been sold on the original shouldn't be marked as settled, but rather it should be removed from your report, to be replaced by an account reported on by whoever the debt was sold on to.
Just to be clear, this was a Co-op credit card? How long had you been in the payment plan? What was the Co-op reporting on your credit file, was it permanently 6 months late markers? Roughly how much was still outstanding on the account (again a ball-park figure will do)?
I feel Lexis and myself will be watching your thread with great interest!
Sorry for not replying earlier. Unfortunately have had some family health probs to deal with so have not had the chance to answer.
Well, surprise, surprise it appears that the CRA entry was a mistake! I did think that this would be the case but had hoped otherwise!
Still getting the lovely letters from the DCA and had a similar reply to my query that Lexis got from the Coop regarding the cancellation/termination notice.
Anyway, will keep this thread updated from now on.
Received a letter from RW re my offer to settle the arrears. They are asking for I&E details before they consider the offer. What's that all about? After all, I'm not going to be paying the arrears up.
Any comments as to what they are up to, if anything (I'm always suspicious!), would be appreciated.
I would send a letter to RW's Complaints Department and tell them that there is no agreement for the alleged account just an illegible application form and as the agreement was unlawfully rescinded at the point of sale, as far as you are concerned the matter is closed and any further correspondence from them will be forwarded directly to the OFT for their attention.
Have been reading through your thread on getting your credit file default entries removed. I have a similar problem in that after unlawfully terminating the alleged agreement they then wait more than 6 months to put a default on my file. I have told them to remove it and explained that they lost the right to report once an alleged agreement is no longer live but they just don't listen!
Got a reply to my previous letter to which they say they have nothing to add to their last letter. They do suggest complaining to the fos if I am not happy!
I have transferred your question to your own thread to prevent possibly highjacking pinky69's thread.
Originally Posted by Lifeafterdebt
Hi lookinforinfo,
Don't want to argue about this but are you are saying that a creditor has a right to report on a credit fileautolinker.com autolinking image even where no legal agreement exists? Surely, just because they do it, it doesn't make it right! After all, there is a lot of things they do that are wrong but they still do them because they think they can get away with it.
I have just had a quick read through this thread and came across this post from Pinky69 who started this thread. It reads.
'A DN is not necessary to make an entry on a credit report -a default indicates that the relationship between the creditor and debtor has broken down. You should read the Information Commissioners Office's Technical Guidance on filing defaults - you will get it on their website. What creditors cannot do is issue a DN which is unlawful for some reason then terminate the account then make a default entry because that action rescinds the agreement and any clauses in the agreement giving permission for the creditor to process your personal data are rescinded with the agreement. A creditor can issue a second DN as long as they haven't terminated the account. If you apply to set aside CCJs on the basis of an unlawful DN and termination then you are going to have to explain to the judge why you didn't raise it at the time of the case. If it has been a while since the the CCJs were handed, it may be very difficult to get them overturned.'
Hope this helps with what I am trying to say.
I would agree with you that once an account has been terminated by the creditor [especially when unlawfully rescinded] that the OC should cease
reporting to the CRAs. They obviously do not have the borrowers permission any longer.
However, the waters are muddied by the fact that creditors have a "legitimate interest" under the Data Protection Act which appears to give them the possibility of continuing to process ones data after an account has been ended-and that is according to the Guidelines of the ICO if you read what they say about legitimate interest.
So in situations where an account has been terminated but then the debt is cleared afterwards for example, it would be more than reasonable for the creditor to inform the CRA without asking the borrower for permission. If you accept that, and I think the ICO and the fos would, then it would be surprising that the creditor would be unable to post any further data on the account without your permission, even if you did not agree with it. You either follow the logic of that or you don't. If the first part is right [because the data is good in that it is good information from the borrowers point of view, and accurate too, then why would the ICO object if the data was not good for the borrower but it was accurate? They would surely think that processing data was a two way street.
However I would say that there can be few cases where there would be any further detrimental data to be posted after an account is closed. So it should be unacceptable for a default to be registered after an account has been terminated. And in your case so long after the account was terminated -and unlawfully rescinded into the bargain.
Once the agreement has been rescinded, all clauses pertaining to the processing of data are rescinded. After rescission the OC has no legitimate interest in processing data or anything else to do with the agreement. If they do, they lay themselves open to a claim for damages (Khophror and Durkin).
LAD Vs Coop
perhaps?
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by lifeafterdebt
