Hi guys When a company recinds and agreement on the back of an invalid default notice where is it exactly that it states that an invalid notice cannot be remedied by issuing a new one? I ask as a creditor seems to think that is exactly what they are going to do! Thanks

Yep 17% for over £2000 net works out at 12% for me! During a tax year do you not have until the April to pay it? When issuing liability orders etc should they not be issued after the current financial year has passed? Thanks

It is worth a shot yes as you never know but the more likely outcome will be a straight no now pay us what you owe us or we will take you to court kind of answer. Really difficult to get them removed if they are legit as you rely on the good nature of the creditor and they usually havent got one. James

Yes magistrates, just wondered it it is a set amount or whether it is a percentage of the wage you earn that month. Thanks

Yes they can just because something is not on your file doesnt mean you dont have to pay it and yes they will take further action against you and you may end up with a CCJ on file.

Hi It is always better to pay the debts off and have the defaults marked as satisfied but as for asking them to remove the entry i am afraid your chances are nil. If the defaults have been placed legit then there really is nothing you can do other then wait for them to drop off. James

Hi Guys Reference attachment of earnings when one is sent to an employer should the employer pay the full amount of the actual debt or should they be agreeing to pay it at a set monthly fee which is also affordable to the employee? Thanks James

Thanks for the reply. Can they be reported to the SRA over their actions. They are claiming they are going to do things there is no chance of them acheiving(idle threats) and giving their clients incorrect advise allegding things that are simply not possible under the CCA. James

Hi Guys Apparently the latest from these idiots is that they are going to get their clients to issue an accurate defualt notice and should i not address it then they will issue a new claim on that default notice. Their reasoning is that as their client unlawfully terminated the agreement it was not done properly so the agreement still stands. I am sure that would stand up in court too. Whether terminated properly or unlawfully it has been terminated. The difference is that unlawful termination loses them any rights under the CCA. How can i get rid of these idiots?

Exactly! As you said - Accurate The info on my file is not accurate

Accuracy of a lender’s default records 39 Records Any default record should be accurate. We normally expect a lender to keep records that are necessary to show an agreement exists and to support filing a default. We would also expect a lender to be able to produce evidence to justify a default record they had placed on a credit reference file. Not having any supporting records may indicate a breach of the data protection principle requiring personal data to be adequate, relevant and not excessive for the purpose for which it is processed. A record that a notice of an intention to file a default was sent, if not a copy of the notice itself, will help lenders to comply with this requirement. 4th Principle of Data Protection Act - Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date. Data has to be accurate, no creditor can place incorrect information on peoples credit files just because the realtionship has broken down. They are entitled to do so providing the information is correct. As for the contract if that is what they are trying to do its simple, there was an agreement in place that was unlawfully terminated on the back of a defective default notice, the reason they did not continue court action as stated in writing by them. They also lost all rights under Section 87 in terminating it as they did which consumer credit laws and regulations are more than clear on so on their heads be it basically.

Before anyone can place a default on your file they first have to send the consumer a legitimate accurate default notice. Without that notice or if it is incorrect then the creditor cannot place the default on file as this would be a clear breach of the Data Protection Act. The ICO state this themselves. As they have admitted it is incorrect then it cannot be placed as what is showing on my file is what is on the default notice, therefore incorrect. Another thing why do they keep making out there is a legal contract between myself and their client when their client terminated the agreement? I will look up the CPUTR and OFT etc see what i can find Thanks

Thanks gh2008 Do you know of any OFT publications/guidelines that state that? Also regarding the credit file entry i know from previous experience of defaults how much of a paint it can be to get things sorted. That said when a company clearly states that the default notice that was issued was incorrect, this is a clear admission that they are breaching the DPA by placing it on my file therefore have no legal defence for it. James

Hi guys Got my money back for fee's which was good. Am really bemused by their recent letter though. They admit in their letter that court action was ended due to the default notice been defective and also admit in writing that therefore their clients terminated the agreement unlawfully. Yet after stating this they further state there is a legal contract between me and theur client and also that 'should' they choose to issue further court action then they will advise the courts of my failure to agree repayments. Am i missing something here or am i right in thinking how the hell would they bring a further sucessful legal case against me after admitting they stopped the first case due to a defective default notice? They are getting beyond a joke and want done with them to be honest, is there anyway i can get them off my back? Either tell them to pursue further action or stop the idle threats? James

Exactly babybear, just what i was trying to point out!

So it is not necessary to find out who the original creditor is to see if they have legally assigned the debt to MH? The only way MH would legally be allowed to add any information on someones file! You really think MH are going to disclose anything to you? And it is not necessary to find out who the original creditor is so Justamy can find out what the default is actually for?

Alot of people still want credit that is not for you to judge. I know 2 entries for the same debt are not allowed that is what i said in the first place. My point what i am getting at is the original creditor needs to be found so it can be found out if they legally assigned the debt to MH. If not then it is the original creditors responsibilty to place the infromation on file. Also there is the fact that justamy doesnt even know what it is for so that needs to be found out too. There is also the question of the default notice that Justamy should have received which needs to be gained. Until it is found out who the original creditor is, whether they legally own the debt and what it is for then there is no point in making a complaint as the ICO will have expected you to have done a reasonable amount of research and direct complaining to the creditor/MH before you put it to them. Once the intial information is found out then complaints and further action can be taken from there.

Who cares how long it takes? I guess the person who is not able to gain credit due to negative entries on their file will care to be honest. How many complaints do you think they already have! Id say thousands yet the CRA's and DCA's carry on business as usual. You seem to be missing the point that the original creditor needs to be found before anything can be done. Once they know who it is, if the information is incorrect then then creditor should be asked direct, dont even deal with the DCA's. Failing that if it is 100% certain the info should not be on file take them to court. You will find it is soon removed. Then feel free to make a comaplint to the ICO and expect an answer sometime in 2012.

No one is saying dont complaint ot the ICO but why should people wait over 12 months to get adverse information that shouldnt be on their file removed as thats how long a typical case will take if not longer. As said it needs to be found out who the original creditor is so it can be taken from there. You cannot make a complaint if you dont even know who is placing the info on your file.

You can tell the CRA's information is incorrect until you are blue in the face. All they will come back with is the creditor has declared the information is correct and therefore it is staying on file. You can threaten them with the ICO all you want, you will be lucky if they resolve a complaint within 12-18 months and he CRA's know this. The quickest and easiest way is the direct route and you first need to find out who is the original creditor claiming this debt then take it from there

Why ae you so concerned about getting the agreement anyway? What is it about the agreement you beleive to be dodgy as you say and how do you know it is if you do not have it?

Firstly you cannot be defaulted twice for the same debt. If a company has legally sold a debt on then they have to decide between themselves who is going to be responsible for the data passed to the CRA's but as said it can only be one. As for you having no idea what it is for you need to contact MH requesting further information and a copy of the default notice which would have to have been sent in order for the creditor whoever it is to place it on your file. Send a copy of the printout so they know what you are referring to as they are not the brightest people on the planet.

Hi The companies only have to send a copy of an agreement to meet a cca request. As long as it contains exactly the same terms and conditions as yours then it is sufficient. You can put the request into default once the time given has passed but it will not get rid of the agreement. Only the courts can declare an agreement unenforceable and even that is alot harder to do these days. They really have to have completely messed it up for the courts to rule it unenforceable. If you have valid grounds for declaring the agreement unenforceable as you havent actually said why you beleive it is then make a complaint to the FOS or take it through the small claims court.

Bump

Hi Guys One thing i was wondering with this if a solicitor is employed by an organisation is not then wrong to act as though they are an independant solcitors firm? DM Rees the regulated solcitor of CK Edrupt & Co is registered on the Solicitors Regualtion Authority as an employee of Provident Personal Finance. An in house solictor is just that not an independant organisation. Happy Christmas : )