Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Pinky69

  1. Martin - Lowell are skunks of the worst type and I didn't say CAG has a hidden agenda but you of all people should know that Lowell certainly have and the site is condoning their actions by allowing them to post on here. Posters have said they don't feel safe being infiltrated in this way and after all they have been through at the hands of Lowell it is no wonder they feel that way. You have seen the effects of Lowell's behaviour on posters and they no longer feel secure on this site. It's like inviting the Gestapo to a Jewish wedding and them saying "We are here to help you." Bull. Since that is CAG's official position, I am off. I am not going to be a member of a forum which openly allows DCAs the opportunity to manipulate posters for payment they are not entitled to - and that is solely their purpose for posting here. As they make these posts, they continue to bully and abuse. There presence here contradicts everything CAG used to stand for but it has obviously now totally lost the plot. Bad move, Martin, and there will be tears before bedtime.
  2. Do you have the agreements? Post them up and we will check them for enforceability. Remember to cover over your personal details.
  3. Uncle Bulgaria - do you work for Lowell??
  4. Ignore the post from Lowells. They are just trying to get payment out of you and site admin are condoning it.
  5. The CRAs are jointly responsible for entries on credit reports - they are joint data controllers with the banks/DCAs. If you have to take your complaint to the ICO then the complaint is against the bank/DCA AND the CRAs.
  6. It is the last payment on the account. If these payments weren't made by your friend then he should challenge the DCA for proof that he made these payments - date, method of payment and amount. He can also state it is Statute Barred if he is sure he did not make these payments and let the DCA argue otherwise, which he would just ignore.
  7. The thing about courts is you never know what way the wind is going to blow. In my view it should be unenforceable but a judge could easily say "You borrowed the money - pay it back" whatever an agreement says. The important thing is to try to avoid going to court at all by using these arguments to put the account in dispute and fight your corner.
  8. The prescribed terms for a loan and insurance must be set out separately as I indicated in a post above. One is restricted use, the other is unrestricted use and that makes it a multi agreement. Loan Interest Total Charge Signature Box Insurance Interest Total Charge Signature Box
  9. Separate signature box or not the loan details have to be set out separately - they are lumped together. The prescribed term for the loan is thus wrong.
  10. I have had 2 complaints upheld by the ICO fairly quickly. I wouldn't say you'll get nowhere with them - far from it.
  11. It is not for them to dispute your dispute and they are just trying to force you to make payment. Send a copy of the Account in Dispute letter to their Complaints Department and mark it at the bottom "Cc The Office of Fair Trading Consumer Credit Licence Fitness Department". Send a copy to the OFT then completely ignore Wescot after that. They will eventually go away.
  12. A complete waste of £10 in my opinion. All a buyer buys is the details - the documentation stays on the records of the original creditor.
  13. You don't want to SAR both - all CQ will have is the name, address, agreement and amount. BOS retains all the information on the account as the original creditor. I don't know where this sending SARs to the DCA crept in.
  14. I would report them to the police for threatening you and you must report them to the OFT. [email protected] Don't speak to them on the phone again - ever. They are obviously a right bunch of charmers.
  15. It is not like them not to go for the jugular on an amount of money like this so they must know there is something wrong with it. BOS repudiated the account when they sold it to CQ after issuing an unlawful DN. If you are 100% sure it was sold to CQ, to make this legally binding you HAVE to write to BOS and tell them that you accept the repudiation of contract which occurred when they sold agreement NO......... dated.............to CQ after issuing an unlawful DN. If you have the date when it was sold insert it. After you have sent that letter, you can write to CQ and state that the alleged agreement is unenforceable and was repudiated by BOS when it was sold to CQ after issue of an unlawful DN. You trust that settles the matter. I repeat I am not a lawyer but this is what I would do based on my own experience and I have seen 12 creditors off the premises. If they did take you to court your arguments are the unenforcability and the unlawful DN - they could be put to strict proof of 1st Class postage.
  16. Subject Access Request - Debt & DCA Send to BOS. Enclose a £10 postal order. They have 40 days to reply. Did the letter from CQ demand the whole amount?
  17. All the more ammo for you to rubbish the agreement - but what counts for enforcement are the prescribed terms.
  18. The 14 days to remedy the breach became law under the CCA 2006 -it was still 7 days in 2005. However, it could only be deemed to be served on the 9th if sent 1st Class and the creditor would have to prove it was sent 1st Class with proof of postage, which they won't have. Otherwise, if sent 2nd class, which is the normal business class, it would not be deemed to be received until the 13th and that would make the date they must give you to remedy the breach the 20th. Posted on the 7th, 4 days for delivery, the weekend doesn't count (Queen's Bench Practice Division 1985), received on the 13th. You now need to find out when the termination date was in an SAR if you don't have the termination notice or the date when the loan was first demanded in full and by whom. Don't mention a word to Capquest or the BOS until you have that information.
  19. Was the date it was sent out 07/06? It's disappeared again.
  20. The CCA. This is a multi agreement under S18 of the CCA 1974. Basically the loan is unrestricted use (you can do what you like with the money) and the insurance loan is restricted use (it can only be used to pay for the insurance). That makes it a multi agreement and as such each should be listed separately and have their own signature box. Amount of loan Interest Total Charge for credit Amount of Insurance Interest Total Charge for Credit with a separate signature box for each. This agreement has been improperly executed and may be unenforceable under S61 of CCA 1974. I say may be only because I am not a lawyer. You can challenge its enforceability with confidence. I'll be back about the DN in a minute
  21. Take out the name, DOB, telephone numbers, place of work,salary and all personal details before we go any further. Anyone can read them and use them and it identifies him to banks and DCAs looking in. Just the loan details and form presentation.
  22. You have posted the DN twice instead of the agreement.
  23. We need to know the date on the Notice to work out if sufficient time was given to remedy the breach.
  • Create New...