Bank has agreed an alleged debt (taken over from Egg) is not enforceable.

But Experian have written saying that they have agreed with banks that they can list non enforceable debts.

Apart from complaining that I am owed compensation for the incorrect listing until they corrected it,

as I told them but they insisted only the bank could amend it,

can I point out an unenforceable debt - which Barclays have told me in writing they agree is unenforceable

- is legally not a debt and that listing it on the CRA site is libel?

Therefore they must remove it and their 'agreement with banks' is yet another example of banks acting unlawfully

and the CRAs are participating in this illegal action?

They are correct that only the bank can make authorise the amendment.

Have you complained to the bank.

Just because a debt cannot be enforced does not mean it is De minimis

The credit agencies are only recording a matter of fact. You are stuck with it on your credit file until the six years are up from the time the default was registered with the agencies

Bank agrees. But I have read on this site a few people have succeeded in getting their report amended without the banks agreement.

But my main question is that if it is agreed that the alleged debt is not legally enforceable then in legal terms there is no debt.

Therefore by listing it the Credit Reference Agencies are acting illegally.

Is this the case?

The bank agree there is no enforceable debt but have told Experian to list the alleged debt with a note it is not enforceable.

They are refusing to recognise any wrongdoing.

I have demanded compensation.

I've seen two cases where compensation was awarded,

one of £500 to someone who already had a bad rating and was told she'd have got more if her record was good,

the other the £8,000 case.

Which the bank has claimed is irrelevant.

They offered me £100 'for a slow response' - but refused to alter the credit reference.

Btw, got rid of various solicitors and debt collection agencies (Marlin was the last one) with two letters max.

Demanding money under false pretences - no enforceable agreement yet threatening me with court.

Mmm. Looking around these forums, if it is agreed there is no enforceable Credit Agreement,

then there is also no consent to give any information about me to credit reference agencies.

Another good argument?

What's your advice?

Thanks in advance.

Look, Im going to be clear here... Loan was issues, it defaulted, Agreement not available, but it's still going to be on your file for 6 years from the account closure date.

Your best way is not through Experian, Its with Barclays...

I suggest you raise a complaint with them and deal with them directly.

[email protected]

[email protected]

Take a read of the following thread wazir...this should explain the process

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?449508-Defaults-and-unenforcable-credit-agreements

Regards

Andy

std practice and has been so for years

and been argued to death

NOA gives the new owners the rights to mark/use CRA information.

is the an EGG loan inherited by barclays

or an EGG card by Barclaycard.

dx

It was an Egg card. But no CCA produced when demanded

. Only a microfiched application form.

Lots of errors on Eggs part

(no evidence of a credit check, without which application is invalid, raising of credit limit without notification, in breach of account T&Cs etc etc.

but none of those have any credence in getting an account removed

dx

Hi Wazir,

Approx when was this a/c opened.

Application for an Egg card was made in 2000.

Points I'm arguing

- if there is no CCA, where is my agreement to let the bank make submissions to CRAs? Do they need it?

I thought it came as a section in the full CCA.

The application specifically refers only to checking your credit record.

Secondly, if there is no enforceable debt, than surely in a strictly legal sense the alleged debt does not exist?

They dont need one to mark your file

There's nothing illegal going on

And if there were it would be unlawful under FCA conc rules & not illegal...its not a criminal matter consumer credit

Tbh it sounds like you are reading the likes of freemen of the land sites

Dx

HI Wazir,

As your card started pre-2007, they need the credit agreement (not the application) to get a CCJ, in theory. This is ultimately up to a court judge to rule on the matter if it went that far.

However, this does not stop the reporting of the alleged debt to CRA's.

But my main question is that if it is agreed that the alleged debt is not legally enforceable then in legal terms there is no debt.

I'm not sure that's true. I can't be sure about this but I believe it is perfectly possible for a debt to exist but recovery not to be possible. Have you taken legal advice on that point?

the only remit concerning the apparent lack of a CCA is that any judgement cannot be enforced In a court of law

so they don't bother with court if they fail to have one.

the rest of the agreement & the T&C's refer and are relevant.

the bottom line is you had the money

you might be able to avoid court through their stupidity of not having a signed CCA

but the rest still runs.

they may ask for payment

you can equally ask them to go away.

by signing the agreement you agreed to be bound by its terms and those of the T&C's

dx

dx

They have agreed there is no CCA.

Therefore there is no 'signed agreement'.

They cannot go to court to claim any money.

I am not reading any other websites as suggested, but trying to find logical holes as per the sentence above and my previous post etc. Which I've yet to see directly answered.

I am aware the law is usually in favour of the big corporations,

but this is not always the case and I am asking to see if anyone has had any success.

It has been stated elsewhere on this site that a few people have got their CRA record changed, apparently without the alleged creditor agreeing.

Also there have been payments (£500 and £8,000) for inaccurate records being placed with CRAs.

The only way of getting credit reference markers removed is by the original creditor

A court has no power to do that unless the entry if through proven fraudulent activity and the creditor refuses to amend your credit record

In your case it will be a simple matter to prove you accessed the creditors service willingly.

If you carry on with this routine and it becomes official, suspicions might be inferred on you for obtaining a financial advantage through an unethical practice

Hi Wazir,

In my experience, you will NOT get CRA markers removed for this a/c just because there is no enforceable credit agreement. You had the money, you failed to repay it and that has been correctly reported on your CRA files.

The ONLY method of getting the adverse CRA markers removed may be by taking court action to recover penalty charges and interest. Part of your settlement negotiations would be to seek the removal of adverse CRA data on the basis that the reported unpaid balance consisted wholly or partially of unlawful penalty charges.

Example cases from the Barclays Successes Forum :-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?110700-Orge-vs-BC-**WON**-chgs-repaid-with-compound-int-t-and-CRA-data-removed-(probably)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?364605-BARCLAYCARD-**WON**-Charges-repaid-with-compound-int-t-and-DN-removed**