Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • 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

Removal of default notices on credit record?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2915 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

hi, having read the article above on how to reclaim your bank and card charges

I was surprised to see that this person thinks its possible to have default notices removed from his credit rating as well! is this possible? is it worth including in my letter to the bank?

quote "The reason why you ask for default notices to be removed is if you defaulted on a charge. It's not fair that your credit record looks bad because of an unfair charge." does this guy have a case?

 

thanks for reading, rob

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 185
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi and Welcome

People are getting default notices removed but it depends on the circumstances of how you got the default.Please use the search facility of the site and it is important you read the FAQ's and around peoples threads it will give you a much clearer idea and will answer any questions you have.

When you want to fool the world, tell the truth. :D

Advice & opinions of Janet-M are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Use your own judgment. Seek advice of a qualified insured professional if you have any

doubts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to the above, although this is not an exhaustive reply to the question - if you were defaulted for an amount that was very close to, or less than, the amount of charges that had been imposed by that date, you would have a good case.

 

In my case, defaulted for around £700 - charges total at that time £2024

 

So I feel I have a case :D

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

In my case, I refused point blank to even discuss settlement unless it included removal of the default. Important to make the distinction between 'removed' and 'settled'.

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I know we'll remove the default if the only balance was charges.

 

If you didn't pay before the default notice was issued and the balance was your transactions and charges, we wont remove it.

 

This is because we're bound by our credit licence to report a true and accurate picture of the way you've managed your account. If your balance included your transactions, you're obliged to pay for them. even if you're disputing part of the balance, you still have a part that you're not disputing that you have to pay for and didn't.

 

I don't know whats happening with those who've gone to court. I can only say what I've been told and that's if any part of the bal was genuine and no payments made the default is correct.

 

Also there is a hugh difference between settling a default and removing it. If you can't get the default removed because of a genuine balance and definately go for the next best option of gettingit showed as settled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point of law that we are following is base upon the total level of charges that had already been imposed at the time the default was issued. In such a case, it would be very unlikely that you could show an account that had never been overdrawn without charges, so I don't quite follow your point above, w_fairy.

 

If an account, for example, had incurred charges totalling very close to the amount it defaulted on, and we accept that the charges are unlawful, then surely it leads to the point of view that had those charges not been imposed, the account would not have defaulted?

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

ok, i'll give you an example which might help.

 

Say your balance was £200 and you paid this in full but it was a few days late so a late payment charge and interest would be added (say £25). This would give you a balance of £25 (because you cleared the previous balance in full).

 

If you then didn't pay and the account eventuallt defaulted six months later for £150. We'd be able to remove the default because the balance was just charges as the £200 payment had cleared your transactions.

 

If your balance was £200 and you only paid £10 but paid it late, getting charges. you then refused to pay because of the charge you received, causing more charges and the account eventually defaults for £365. We'd be unable to remove the default because even if all the fees were refundedm you'd still have your original £200 that you've not paid for.

 

As I said before, i don't deal with those going through court claims. The amounts I deal with, the refunds still don't clear the balance. So I can't tell you what would happen to the default if the refunds cleared the balance.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
I have had my default on my Credit file removed from HSBC (credit card), as they could not supply me with a 'true and signed copy of the original default notice'.

 

Best regards

Interesting. How much arm twisting did you have to do?

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No arm twisting, honest.

 

I used a template that I got off this forum, and hey presto, I recieved a letter from HSBC, stating that 'due to the age of the account, we are unable to provide copy (of) documentation as required. A request has been made today to remove this record from your credit file'.

 

I checked last week and the default has been removed from Experian & Equifax. The debt was for £1300 (roughly) and not made up of charges.

 

God honest truth it took 15 days!

 

If you want a copy of the letter I sent, I will be happy to oblige.

 

Best regards

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, well done. This puts you in the category of the elite few! Would you mind zipping me the letter that you used? I'm soon to try to persuade the Mighty Egg to remove a default entry on my file. Not such an easy road ahead, I fear!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am with the Abbey. When my OH got made redundant and then I got made redundant too (and consequently going to employment tribunal) Abbey threatened to withdraw our Overdraft. On the promise that both our salaries got paid into the bank they would not withdraw the overdraft. However, before our salaries were paid in they wrote to us to tell us that they were taking the overdraft off us. This meant I had no choice but to put my money somewhere else otherwise we could not have eaten! I then made proposals to pay by email - was ignored. I then sent a recorded delivery letter with my proposals - which they ignored. I then telephoned them to be told that they were awaiting the outcome of my court case for reclaiming charges and they would put the account on hold for two weeks. NOW they are threatening to default me in the next week. I have managed to get a stay of execution for a month but this means me trying to find £3,000 by the end of the month - no mean feat. I feel like I am being threatened due to my claim for bank charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you post a copy of your letter please?

 

Regards

 

Jeff

 

No arm twisting, honest.

 

I used a template that I got off this forum, and hey presto, I recieved a letter from HSBC, stating that 'due to the age of the account, we are unable to provide copy (of) documentation as required. A request has been made today to remove this record from your credit file'.

 

I checked last week and the default has been removed from Experian & Equifax. The debt was for £1300 (roughly) and not made up of charges.

 

God honest truth it took 15 days!

 

If you want a copy of the letter I sent, I will be happy to oblige.

 

Best regards

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, below is a copy of the letter that I sent.

 

Best regards

 

20th June 2006

 

Dear Sir/Madam

Account number – 5434 XXXXXXXXXX

 

After recently obtaining a copy of my credit file from Equifax I was concerned to note that your company has placed a "Default" notice against an account in my name.

Further to this I have no recollection of ever receiving such a notice, and I therefore require you to substantiate this data at your earliest convenience.

1. You must supply me with a true copy of the alleged agreement you refer to. This is my right under your obligation to supply a copy of the agreement under the legislation contained within s.78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 (s.77 (1) for fixed sum credit). Your obligation also extends to providing a statement of account. I enclose a £1 cheque in payment of the statutory fee, Cheque number 100171.

2. You must supply me with a signed true and certified copy of the original default notice

I would request that this data is provided to me within the next 14 days, if you are unable to provide this data then I must insist that it is removed from my files as unsubstantiated.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

 

David

 

Hope this helps.

  • Confused 1

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

here is a link to a website with template letters for removing defaults

Remove Default Notices on a Credit File - We show you how

DPA Halifax Acc 1- 27th June 06

Acknowledement - 14th July 06

Request of payment from me - 21st August 06

Rang them stating paid charge for statements - 21st August o6

Told me they would be sent out next day - 21st August 06

DPA Halifax Acc 2 -29th August 06

DPA Barclays - 29th August 06

DPA Halifax Visa - 29th August06

DPA Halifax Acc 2 - received 30th August 06

DPA Barclays - received 30th August 06

Link to post
Share on other sites

No - the latter usually let you know the consequence of not paying, but an actual Default Notice is the legal requirement to say "it's now been done"

..

.

 

Opinions given herein are made informally by myself as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...
I have had my default on my Credit file removed from HSBC (credit card), as they could not supply me with a 'true and signed copy of the original default notice'.

 

Best regards

 

This is very encouraging. Just yesterday I sent out copies of the same template letter to HSBC for a credit card and current account. Balances cleared off years ago so with luck I'll get the same response in the same speedy manner. Then I can get a decent mortgage, it's the only negative stuff on my credit file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
This is very encouraging. Just yesterday I sent out copies of the same template letter to HSBC for a credit card and current account. Balances cleared off years ago so with luck I'll get the same response in the same speedy manner. Then I can get a decent mortgage, it's the only negative stuff on my credit file.

 

Make sure you correspond with the Group Data Protection Office at Canada Square rather than custome services

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent mine 2 weeks ago to

 

Service Quality Team

HSBC Bank

Arlington Business Centre

Millshaw Park Lane

Leeds

LS11 0PP

 

Asked in the branch and was given this address. didn't see this thread till after I had sent it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a default is marked at 8 and the status history is the number of months you are behind with a payment, the lastest being in brackets. I think this is correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys!

 

I have recently claimed my unlawful bank charges and it was successful as i recieved the cheque from Natwest last week.

 

There is a default still on my credit report is there anyway i can get it off as i have accepted theyr cheque?

 

Hope so!!!!

 

Thanks

Saz xXx

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2915 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...