Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by oneofakind

  1. Good afternoon, and welcome! Sound like we got the same letter See http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?443056-Partially-Satisfied-Lowell-offer-(4-Viewing)-nbsp for my thread on the same... As stated there, don't bite! Check first, this could be statute barred, and already off your file.
  2. It may well be SB.... most of my actions with these accounts date back to 2007/08 - as you'd see by my previous postings! You've confirmed my suspicions, so this just gets added to the pile and ignored for now, while I check the SB status. Thanks.
  3. Hi all, Back after a long break, good to see some of the old familiar names are still here.... My OH has a very complicated credit history. Lots of accounts are being paid off under a plan which was originally put in place by CAB, then taken over by me once i discovered CAG. She has just received an 'offer' from our good friends at Lowell - a discount of 75% to pay off an old bank debt. on receipt of payment they will 'update your credit file to show the account as partially satisfied and we will close your account'. Now, would I be right in thinking that 'partially satisfied' is absolutely no use to us, and we should ignore this offer like all the rest? Just to avoid the obvious questions, this loan is certainly pre-2007; we are not currently paying anything, and i don't remember without digging into the mountain of files when the last payment or acknowledgement was. All i need is an opinion on the 'partially satisfied' gambit.
  4. Well, Almost 3 months now, and no payment has been received! Lots and lots of excuses, false promises etc. Maddeningly, I know of at least one person who started their claim after my last post, and they've been paid! Any suggestions? {sorry Madge - not been on here for a while! The claim started during a restucturing of her finances due to the illness - this was actually all done in-house by ltsb (an extremely helpful face to face advisor, I have to admit!). Because her condition was disclosed to the bank when the loan was taken out, she should have not been sold ppi in the first place, and this was admitted by the bank. All dealings were face to face: the advisor met with A. and my OH. Personally, I'd be doing everything in writing, you can't beat a paper trail!}
  5. Latest news... She received an offer letter.. settlement in the region of £4k, which was considerably more than she was expecting. So she phoned them up and accepted (against my advice, not having seen the letter, t&c's etc). They suggested they could set the award against the outstanding balances that she has... She said 'er, I'd rather have a cheque' - and they agreed! Promised it within 14 days. Not counting any chickens yet, but looking good.
  6. Hi folks, I'm seeking some advice on behalf of a family member - She took out a LTSB loan some years ago, and was bunged PPI as part of the deal. Because of illness, she eventually defaulted on the loan (NOT COVERED BY THE PPI), which is now being handled by Moorcroft; she pays them monthly. (I don't know if Moorcroft own the debt, or are collecting on behalf of LTSB) She's made a complaint about mis-sellin, which has been 'handled' internally by LTSB. They have recently sent her what appears to be a standard offer letter, offering repayment of her premiums plus 8% interest (no figures quoted). BUT - they want to deduct the 'refund' from the outstanding balance on the loan. I don't believe this is fair, as this is money she was charged wrongly, and in my view should be put back in her hand. The fact is that even a relatively small sum like this would be a great help to her - she lives hand-to -mouth, and never has a spare few quid for herself, despite working 50+ hours a week. Can anyone advise whether this is acceptable? The letter implies that her options are to accept what's offered, or go to the FOS. Sorry, I don't have any details beyond what I've given, but appreciate I'll need to find out more. Any advice greatly appreciated. Regards, Oneofakind.
  7. Dean, The APR is not high to stop you spending. It's high to make them money! You do realise if you only make the minimum payment, your debt actually INCREASES, if my OH's experience is anything to go by? 3 months since she used the card, all payments made on time, balance up by £50 !!!!!!!!!!!
  8. Thanks Dx. So are you saying that the 'claimant' is no longer obliged to produce the agreement should court proceedings happen? D.
  9. Hi Guys, Been a while since I was last here, and I need to check up on a couple of things. I've been dealing with my partner's financial mess (due to illness and loss of job) for a few years with the help of CAG. Everything has been under control for a while now, but recently we've had letters chasing accounts we didn't recognise.... anyway we finally worked out that they're for accounts CCA'd about 4 years ago, and no CCA received. What I need to ask is, obviously we haven't reached SB yet, but has there been any change to the CCA, or any other law, which would prevent me simply saying 'I do not acknowledge - show me the paperwork' to keep them at bay a while longer? Regards to all, D.
  10. If you have paid the required amount, then terminate the agreement and let them have the car back. You are fully within your rights to do this, and there is NOTHING they can do about it. Just make absolutely sure that you've paid your 50%.... and that you can do without the car!
  11. Mr Nice-on-the-phone (must be new!) said that because of my excellent payment record, my credit rating would be much better now....... I have a long list of people who could tell him otherwise.... :D
  12. Welcome have been phoning me recently about my loan (which is in good order). Apparently if I double the payments, I'll be able to pay it off more quickly! Or, I could 'get a bank loan to pay the balance off, because our rates aren't the cheapest, you know......' Or I could even 'take out one of these 0% credit cards, put the balance on that' Now honestly Mr Welcome... if the banks and the credit card sharks were falling over themselves to offer me great deals like this, do you really think I would have had to get the loan from you in the first place? Really? Double the payments...Very funny. Don't you know there's a credit crunch on?;-);-);-)
  13. Sheer desperate bull***t. Please don't be intimidated by rubbish like this. YOU know the debt is Statute Barred. WE know the debt is Statute Barred. THEY know the debt is Statute Barred - hence desperate intimidatory tactics like this. Stuff 'em! D.
  14. Good luck. Hope they agree on something reasonable.
  15. . If the OP wishes to make a F&F payment, and get the creditor off his back forever, why shouldn't he? The first post appears to imply a (reluctant) acceptance of the debt. I'm sure Minmac would rather not be dragged to court, if he can settle the issue!
  16. No fixed amounts.... just don't offer more than you can actually afford. Maybe you should start low, and let them go for a higher amount (I'm sure they'll try...) Have you checked for any unlawful charges on the account?
  17. A company spokesperson said: "This is a genuine mistake. It occurred due to us carrying out some minute adjustments to clear our systems following a management buyout. But they still sent the LYING letter saying that a judgement had been obtained? Hope someone is complaining about HF's shocking and ILLEGAL LIES!!!
  18. This is a good result, but let's not get carried away. We KNOW that County Court rulings do not set precedent. The Claims company here appear to be 'bigging up' future prospects, as you'd expect. It's great advertising for them! As Bookworm said above, the case is a good reference, but I don't see it as 'opening the floodgates' IMHO. Have to wonder if MBNA will just take the hit, or go to appeal. Am I right in thinking that if they go to a higher court, and LOSE, then a precedent WILL be set?
  19. ...and you can also stop paying them, until such time as they come up with the goods.
  20. It's fairly common practice, but the statutory 12 days still applies. Their failure to supply is all good for you, of course.
  21. BBC NEWS | Business | Court lets woman off £8,000 loan Sad that they describe it as a 'let-off', when the finance company mis-sold their PPI, and could not produce the agreement!
  22. It's ALL relevant, really... This case appears to be such a shambles, they'd be stupid to try it on in court. Sadly, they often do, relying on lack of knowledge, or fear of the court process, to intimidate their victims into paying. Defend stoutly! D.
  23. The judgement from the court should show the amount of the debt.
  24. Were/are you in a Union? Seems like you've been very shabbily treated, and you may be entitled to some help from them.
  • Create New...