Jump to content

make them aktiv runners

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


make them aktiv runners last won the day on September 6 2008

make them aktiv runners had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

642 Excellent

About make them aktiv runners

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder
  1. Only Signature and date or were the other boxes also completed? It is an application form. There is a divide among caggers whether application forms are legimate CCAs. Whatever you believe I sure think you will be welcomed by CFC, it took you some time to join.
  2. 7 mistakes in colour below Our charges are fair and reasonable. They also have said "Though this charge does not have to be reasonable, ...it does in fact bear a close relationship to the cost the Bank incurs in providing the requested service. Obviously that cost goes beyond the price of paper and postage, and includes for example a proportion of the cost of all the systems that are involved once an over-limit situation arises." The Charges were a genuine pre-estimate of damage. They also said that the charges are "fair having regard to the following matters: (a) the cost to the B
  3. Waksman decided what was reasonable to supply for £1 today. It should have been based on what was reasonable for £1 when the fee was first brought in. Parliament has chosen not to increase the fee, it should not make any difference to the original meaning of that £1.
  4. Deed of Assignment is between Halifax PLC & Capquest Investments Ltd. Capquest Debt Recovery are a third party not part of the deed of assignment. I would have thought one of the parties to the assignment had to give notice of assignment. There is nothing wrong with Capquest Investments Ltd appointing Capquest Debt Recovery with a separate NOA.
  5. Keywords highlighted. This is a delight for the industry. Only in section 5 after failing to send a reconstruction do they actually have to check there is an original. The guide basically says they can reconstruct agreements to mirror what would have been completed by reference to anything on their systems, that in itself says they do not have to look at the original at all. The only time it is wrong to reconstruct an agreement is if there never was one completed in the first place. Again it clarifies that by never being one means that type of contract would never have required an a
  6. Did anyone else spot this relating to the full register which will still be sold to CRAs
  7. I agree most judges will not comprehend arguments over securitisation at the moment. I disagee with P1 slightly as securitisation can unravel a legal route to show DCAs do not quite have the whole debt as a DOA may suggest. The DOA itself is only part of a huge contract, how can anyone possibly know if the DCA is the whole owner in law, or just an owner of what is effectively a servicing charge?
  8. 1. Ownership is based on assignment under S136 Law of Property Act. They must have bought the debt absolutely and be in a position to accept a full & final settlement. Must also be able to sue in their own name and you must have been informed of the assignment. You should have a letter stating assignment or possibly purchase. Personally I would want this from the seller. Also to know exactly what the assignment or purchase give them rights to, you would need sight of the actual contract between seller and buyer. 2. At least one of the former site team went this route. It was either Bookw
  9. I was once refused a loan on the basis I could not afford to pay our bills.... the account was always in credit. That was many many moons ago when they assumed all bills against 1 income when you had 2 incomes and did not offer joint loans. Above is intended to show you how things have changed over the years, ie in the old days you would be unlikely to have got the loan. I disagree with your last statement to some extent. The bank should have made some condition for you to use £1000 to clear the overdraft and reduced your overdraft limit drastically..... well that is my opinion of wh
  10. Letter from HFC on previous page suggests land registry entry remains in HFCs name.
  11. 1. You can only obtain as much proof as you can and hope you are right. 2. With no CCA they may pass it on. Doubtful they would do so with the thought of money coming their way. 3. Get everything confirmed in writing. Post it up here for people to double check, minus your personal details. Credit files can be marked as satisified, unlikely they would remove past data, eg default date 4. Keep to a low %, no CCA makes the lowest offer and highest bargaining tool.
  12. Simple answer is because they can get away with it, for now at least.
  13. I agree CPR31.16, the whole point is to cover your back by asking the right questions the right way, not as some others suggested to sit back using CCA 74.
  14. A lot going by what they usually make. If all 100 are caggers, of course the 10 can be identified. In the real world only a fraction of consumers know their rights, so realistically there is more chance of people paying if they all receive the same reconstituted agreements.
  15. Michelle, if you ask for something under the Consumer Credit Act and that Act is complied with, you cannot then rely on another law. NB. I am not in any way suggesting it is right to produce reconstituted agreements at all, I am just resonding to the situation as it seems to legally stand with the Manchester case. Lengths at avoiding paying was not aimed at you directly, it was a statement of fact of this site. Yes there are legal reasons for people to refuse payment, however, you cannot ask under one law and then hope to use a different one when you do not get what you want. As I sa
  • Create New...