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?
  • 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

iDem Servicing/lombard loan


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3218 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 All,

 

I've been paying Arden Credit Management for a few months now (after Moorcroft passed the debt on to them).

 

This was in relation to a Lombard Direct loan.

 

I've not been missing payments, but I get a letter every month, stating:

 

"We wrote to you recently to advise that payments are not being received in line with our request for you to commence repayment of the remaining balance. We now require payment from you."

 

I've paid by the due date and every time, I've requested the authorisation number for the payment.

 

I've seen in another thread that Lombard have ceased giving out loans. They do, however, send me a statement once a year and notified me in writing that Arden were taking over the administration of my account.

 

I am currently paying them £15 per month, although I'm on JSA. I'm going to phone them - I know everyone says don't, but I'm confident enough to do so - and inform them that the account is up-to-date and they should stop wasting their time, as I have proof of all payments.

 

I will then offer them a new repayment plan of £5 a month. If they refuse, this will be reduced to £2 a month and then put in writing. If they don't want to accept it, that's their tough luck.

 

My question, however, is this:

 

If Lombard have ceased trading (as stated by Cerberusalert in another thread) then presumably the debt has been bought by Arden.

 

Is it worthwhile me sending a CCA request if they refuse my payment offers?

 

I'm not trying to avoid paying, just trying to fight incompetent bullies, using their own tactics - I want to legitimately clear any debt owed, but I cannot afford to do it on their terms.

 

If the worst comes to the worst, I own no property, have no appreciable assets, no savings and my only income is JSA, so if they wanted to take me to court, my response would be, "Go on, then."

 

I have nothing to lose, but would a CCA request be a waste of time and what little money I do have?

 

Any advice gratefully received.

 

Thanks

Edited by Halibutt
Spelling mistake. I do hate that... LOL

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just phoned them and offered £5 per month, quoting their advice in their letter(s) saying to seek financial advice if my circumstances mean I'm unable to meet payment levels...

 

ME: "Why have I been getting these letters?"

MUPPET: "I really don't know sir, it seems to be automated."

ME: "I've read your notice on your letter and have sought advice regarding repayments. I can set up a standing order for £5 per month."

MUPPET: "That wouldn't be acceptable sir."

ME: "I'm on JSA, have taken advice and been told that's the most I should be offering."

MUPPET: "You MUST send an I & E sheet or we'll be unable to proceed."

ME: "I'm not obliged to do that."

MUPPET: "It's a requirement sir, without that, we cannot process your account."

ME: "Yes you can, and I'm not obliged to send one."

MUPPET: "I'm sorry, we can't."

ME: "In that case, I'll put an offer to you in writing then."

MUPPET: "That would make no difference, you need to send an I & E sheet."

ME: "In that case, I'll start by sending you a CCA request."

MUPPET: "Okay sir, goodbye."

 

Hmmm... Very helpful....

 

CCA request tomorrow morning then!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Cartaphilus
Just phoned them and offered £5 per month, quoting their advice in their letter(s) saying to seek financial advice if my circumstances mean I'm unable to meet payment levels...

 

ME: "Why have I been getting these letters?"

MUPPET: "I really don't know sir, it seems to be automated."

ME: "I've read your notice on your letter and have sought advice regarding repayments. I can set up a standing order for £5 per month."

MUPPET: "That wouldn't be acceptable sir."

ME: "I'm on JSA, have taken advice and been told that's the most I should be offering."

MUPPET: "You MUST send an I & E sheet or we'll be unable to proceed."

ME: "I'm not obliged to do that."

MUPPET: "It's a requirement sir, without that, we cannot process your account."

ME: "Yes you can, and I'm not obliged to send one."

MUPPET: "I'm sorry, we can't."

ME: "In that case, I'll put an offer to you in writing then."

MUPPET: "That would make no difference, you need to send an I & E sheet."

ME: "In that case, I'll start by sending you a CCA request."

MUPPET: "Okay sir, goodbye."

 

Hmmm... Very helpful....

 

CCA request tomorrow morning then!

 

Sounds like you had a very interesting conversation with their coffee machine. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt they'd even be able to make a decent cup of coffee mate!

 

The trouble is that with these DCAs, if they actually listened to their "clients" instead of reading from a looped script, then they'd get much further. I want to pay off the debt, but they need to realise that I can't afford what they're asking if I simply haven't got it! Surely even the dimmest of DCAs must realise that £5 a month is better than nothing???

 

Maybe one day, there'll be a reasonable DCA - if that happens, then all others would go out of business.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Cartaphilus
Maybe one day, there'll be a reasonable DCA - if that happens, then all others would go out of business.
Unlikely to happen. It's the nature of this business. It hasn't changed in centuries ie you owe money, this is how you are treated. Morality has no place here, conscience certainly hasn't a place in what many have witnessed before now. Compassion? Forget it.

 

Sounds like you had a very interesting conversation with their coffee machine. :biggrin:

 

If you know any Douglas Adams books, you'll appreciate my comment more ref 'coffee machines'. They were just as annoying, just as automatic. ;)

Edited by Cartaphilus
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi All,

 

Arden Credit Management have been demanding unrealistic repayment amounts. I don't dispute that I owe the amount that they're claiming on behalf of Lombard Direct, but I do dispute the amount they say I should be paying.

 

Their staff have been obtuse and unhelpful, so I've adapted a letter by Harassed Senior and come up with the following:

 

Arden Credit Management

PO Box 15276

Solihull

B91 9PN

4th November 2010

By Royal Mail Recorded Delivery

Dear Sir/Madam,

Account Ref: xxxxxxxxxx

 

With regards to my current “repayment arrangement” with you, I am in a position to be able to offer you no more than £5 per calendar month.

I own no property, have no savings or appreciable assets and rely on Job Seekers’ Allowance as my sole source of income.

I quote the Department of Work & Pensions, who state:

“You will be paid the sum of £65 per week, which is the legal minimum on which the Government believes you need to live on.”

During telephone calls, your staff have asserted that I am obliged to provide you with a personal statement of income/expenditure in order to put a repayment plan into place. This is, of course, incorrect.

 

I have been advised that this 'personal' information is just that - personal.

However, following the insistence of your staff and their claims that an income/expenditure statement is a requirement regarding this matter, I have obtained a Court orientated Income and Expenditure Form, to which, I understand, only a Court and/or Judge can legally have access, and filled in the details required therein.

 

Following the revelations about my financial status that completing this form brought to light, I would like to thank you and your staff for pointing me in the right direction regarding my legal rights.

 

From this information it is obvious that I currently have no disposable income.

It has been suggested that, following discovery of this situation, a County Court Judge would, in all probability, order that I can afford no more that £1 per month to each and all creditors, which of course includes you.

Therefore, I would formally request that you supply me with the relevant information/documents necessary for me to set up a standing order to continue paying instalments towards the amount owing on the above account.

Please note that I have no intention of avoiding any legally claimed repayments on the above account, but I firmly believe that my offer of repayment is just and fair, considering my current circumstances. Should these circumstances change, I will, of course, notify you as soon as possible to arrange repayment at a higher monthly amount.

Yours faithfully,

Halibutt

Many thanks to Harassed Senior. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what I should take out of the above or maybe add? Is this a good template for the unemployed to use when bullied by DCAs?

Thanks in advance for any input.

H. x

 

Edited by Halibutt
Sodding spelling mistakes... *sigh*

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks PGH, but it's clear that Arden are acting on behalf of Lombard. Lombard have also kept to the letter of the law in as much as they've sent regular statements and notified in writing of who would be administering the account.

 

I'm thinking that if they refuse the £5 a month (which I'm sure they will) then I'll offer them £1.

 

I really don't care if they want to take me to court - I can't lose what I honestly don't have. In fact, in some ways, a CCJ would be doing me a favour... my credit rating will never be properly repaired, I'm never going to apply for credit again and have no way of getting a mortgage.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the suggestion PGH, but I'm absolutely sure that Lombard have all the correct paperwork and they've been very careful to supply a default notice (worded and dated correctly) an annual statement of account, including all payments made, etc. I'm pretty sure they have a valid CCA as well.

 

But, on to the good news... Arden have sent a very amicable letter, complying with all my requests and agreeing to a token payment of £1 per calendar month.

 

My impression of them from the awful attitudes and ignorance of their call centre staff was that they were appalling, but at least in their written communications, they have actually proven to be quite considerate so far (maybe the way the letter was worded had something to do with it - thanks Harassed Senior!)

 

They've also kept to my request for no further telephone contact - which is more than other DCAs have done!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The ongoing saga...

 

I received the following from Arden, agreeing to accept £1 pcm. My offer was ongoing - not for just three months.

 

I completed the standing order form and sent it to my bank, though with reservations as the info fields weren't completely clear. As a "belt and braces" precaution, I phoned Arden and explained that I wanted to pay £1 that day just in case there was anything wrong with the Standing order request. That was 17th November 2010. They happily took my £1 and said they'd be expecting regular payments on the 28th of each month as I'd stated.

 

This was their letter:

 

th_48091_1_122_141lo.jpg

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I'd feared, the bank returned my standing order form, saying that parts were not completely clear and could I clarify. I did this and sent the Standing Order back to the bank, who have now accepted it and said they'd commence payments from December. Glad I paid Arden in November by phone, or they might whinge that I hadn't kept to my agreement...

 

Received this from Arden:

 

th_47991_2_122_178lo.jpg

 

Muppets. They're wrong - payment plan was adherred to - paid 11 days early... You'd think they'd have the professionalism to correctly record all transactions. I've got the authorisation number for the payment too. They say they record calls, so come on Arden, have a listen back to what was said - full explanation there!

Edited by Halibutt

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I received the following threat-o-gram:

 

th_48162_3_122_345lo.jpg

 

My reaction is simply to leave the standing order going and file the above under "ignore". I just wanted to check if anyone had any other thoughts on this please.

 

I'm posting everything in this whole story, in the hope that it may benefit others in the future.

 

My thanks as always.

 

H. x

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Tingy.

 

I think it was just computer generated as they had a good ten days between the last two letters.

 

It was a nice feeling this morning when I opened the envelope and just thought, "Is that it?" Previously I'd have been really worried and assumed that I'd done something wrong. Since finding CAG, my attitude and knowledge have changed and I haven't had a bad night's sleep since.

 

Thanks to all :)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Halibutt

 

I think it's computer generated. I have numerous telephone calls (even letters) where they say 'you will receive threatogram xyz but please ignore it'.

 

They don't like £1 p.m. so just press the nearest button.

 

Thanks for your support at the start of my fight-back.

 

love

 

vic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Vic. Your support is, in turn, also much appreciated. I know they don't like £1 a month, but they have no option. Might they take me to court? Go on then... see what happens. I have nothing for them to take!

 

I'll update this thread as and when there's anything to report.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Vic. Your support is, in turn, also much appreciated. I know they don't like £1 a month, but they have no option. Might they take me to court? Go on then... see what happens. I have nothing for them to take!

 

I'll update this thread as and when there's anything to report.

 

I learnt a long time ago not to worry about what they might do, as more often than not they don't so you've been having sleepless nights over nothing. If they take further action, post it up and we'll deal with it. Until then don't worry about what might happen as it probably won't!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

As people often say that they'd like to know what's happened with various cases, here's the current situation with mine. It looks like they are either incompetent, trying to harass me into phoning them or both!

 

Letter from Arden to say I don't have an agreed repayment plan:

 

be2c88115082930.jpg

 

And my polite but slightly withering reply (including pointing out their typo and their apparent ignorance...) stating that I do have an agreed repayment plan:

 

62b65b115083407.jpg

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Latest episode in this incompetent fiasco...

 

5af42d116959625.jpg

 

My proposed reply:

 

Sarah Powell

Arden Credit Management

PO Box 15276

Solihull

B91 9PN

2011

 

By Royal Mail Recorded Delivery

 

Dear Ms Powell,

 

Account Ref:

 

I refer to your letter of xx January 2011, the contents of which have been duly noted.

 

I am very concerned at your apparent reluctance to acknowledge my correspondence with you, regarding the above account. All letters have been sent via Royal Mail Recorded Delivery at my own expense and accordingly, signed for by your staff as having been received.

 

To date, I have kept to the repayment plan, to which you agreed in writing in your letter of xx November 2010.

 

I hereby give you notice that should you continue to write, erroneously asserting that no payment plan has been agreed, I will have no alternative but to invoice your company for my time and expenses incurred when formulating and sending replies to such letters.

I am sure you will agree that the continuation of your current policy of harassment would not be advantageous to either party whilst I am adhering to the current agreed repayment plan.

 

Future invoices will be broken down as follows:

 

Time taken to formulate response:

£25.00

 

 

Postage costs per item by Royal Mail Recorded Delivery:

£01.15

 

 

Printing costs per A4 sheet:

£00.15

 

 

Photocopying costs per A4 sheet:

£00.10

 

 

Total minimum charge per response:

£26.40

 

Please note that I have retained copies of all correspondence, both sent and received, including Post Office receipts, proofs of delivery and statements of receipt of amounts by the Original Creditor – RBS/Lombard Direct, which, to date, includes acknowledgement of the first instalment submitted in my repayment plan.

 

I therefore expect no further correspondence from your company, unless it is:

 

 

  • Your written acknowledgement and acceptance of the content of this letter
  • Correspondence regarding information that you are legally obliged to supply whilst dealing with the above account
  • Periodic review of the existing repayment plan

 

Please treat this letter as urgent.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Halibutt

 

 

Any thoughts please, fellow CAGers?Anything I should add or omit?

 

Thanks for your continuing support.

 

H. x

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...