Jump to content

renegotiation

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    1,186
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

288 Excellent

About renegotiation

  • Rank
    Classic Account Holder
  1. I can well appreciate the principle of what you are saying there, but please bear in mind the age of the debtor and the fact that he wanted to have a sense of total closure on what he saw as outstanding issues. Moreover, apart from 1st Credit seemingly acting a bit silly for a little while, Santander were the only company to respond in the manner that they did. He never ever expected to encounter such obstinacy. . Yes, but as I understand it, this is only if there wasn't a 6 year gap in them asking for payment. As per the CONC: "...a firm must not attempt to recover a statu
  2. Well, after being assigned an adjudicator by the FOS, exchanging some explanatory emails too, we eventually got this email through. Dear Mr. ****, I apologise for my delayed response, I was out sick last week. Thank you for your detailed email, I’ve received some information from Santander but not enough to help me form an opinion on how to put things right. However, I’d like the opportunity to investigate whether Santander has sent you annual statements for the last 11 years and if it can evidence this. Therefore, I’ve asked for evidence of all the correspondence that
  3. I have had an idea. Can in not be the case that individual forum members could simply 'opt out' of this new time limit, if they chose to do so? I don't know how the forum software works, but assume it shouldn't be a problem. I am big enough and ugly enough to not feel pressured into editing my posts by other forum members.
  4. Ah, I didn't think of that as a possibility. Would even the Bottom Feeders Union do such a thing to each other though?
  5. Yes, but if one is to ultimately go to the FOS, the it is surely best to at least try to lay out everything for them beforehand. The first letter was pretty much a template letter, though it was of course edited to suit. We definitely thought it was appropriate to at least send one further letter. Furthermore, from experience, we have usually avoided going to regulators, whatever the company and industry might be, by persevering a little bit. It can save a lot of time and doesn't often waste much time. Yes, Santander aren't disputing that though. We are simply saying tha
  6. I am very glad to hear it. Still, we found that we were much better off regardless, as all of them that were still writing and phoning (bar one) did stop after the debts were formally declared statute barred. They all wrote back, even the ones that had never ceased chasing, and formally acknowledged that this was the case as well. It was a much better feeling to have them all stop and put it all in writing, so I would still recommend everyone go through the process. One of the reasons I did wonder, and thus started this thread, was because one of the DCA
  7. Cahoot Debt Management Operations P.O. Box 398 Sheffield S9 2GQ. I am sure you will agree, I am sure anyone would agree, that it is beyond the realms of possibility I was sent an annual statement in the post for 11 years running that somehow got lost. I was a chartered account in my working life, auditing firms for the government, and I scrupulously file away all correspondence I receive. Moreover, I often said to my family that I had never heard anything further from Cahoot about the credit card when I periodically reviewed my financial affairs. Now, why Cahoot never once c
  8. I heartily agree with you. I was just editing a post now and found the new rule bizarre. If the logic for this change was that some posters were being pressured or harassed into changing their posts by other posters, then the solution must surely have been to clamp down on those engaged in such activities in the first place right? I am sure that much more harm than good will come from this and it is very shortsighted. Someone might have posted something that they really didn't want to post and not immediately realised. I don't think that they would feel best pleased seeing the 'please contact
  9. As I saw it, a company was still allowed to pursue a statute barred debt, if they hadn't lapsed in requesting repayment from the debtor for a period of longer than 6 years. Anyhow, it's all irrelevant when it comes to this case, as the creditor never made any contact with the debtor for a whopping 11 years, which only changed after the debtor made contact with the creditor. At the very least, we did have a good, hearty laugh after reading all of their rubbish. I am still a bit miffed as to why they are behaving like this. We put it to the Ombudsman that perhaps they totally lost track of
  10. This doesn't affect me or anyone close to me personally, as all statute barred debts have been formally declared statute barred. However, I was just wondering what might happen to someone's estate, if it was the case that that they had a lot of statute barred debt and hadn't actually declared it as such? Would it make any difference? I do know that some companies tend to write off debt after a customer dies, regardless of whether it is statute barred or not, but there are no doubt always a few unscrupulous rogues about. Could they potentially
  11. Well, no one seemed to have any further ideas, so this did get sent off to the FOS in the end. I will update the thread after the case is concluded.
  12. Crikey, how time flies! I advised the person concerned with this issue to go to the FOS, but they asked me to check on this forum first for some suitable advice as well. The person concerned is now 82 years old and recently went over a lot of paperwork involving a whole host of old debts. It was all well statute barred and, although they weren't hearing much from any of the companies concerned, decided it would be best to send out statute barred letters en masse. What occurred afterwards was quite remarkable in my opinion. Now, most of the debt had been bought by DCA's, but there were a
  13. Yes, exactly what I thought before I looked. Moreover, 99 times out of 100 I will find exactly what I am searching for when I look online. However, after searching for 10 minutes or so, I couldn't find what I thought was the last version. What I did find were some older versions, as mentioned, and a lot of material discussing the said guidelines. As this all involves an official complaint that might have to go to the F.O.S., then I thought I should ask, as it's always better to be safe than sorry. Thank you. Yes, that does all match up. Thank you.
  14. I have a query, which I hope someone can help me with. In the Consumer Credit Sourcebook, under Section 7.15 about 'Statute barred debts', there are numerous references to paragraphs and annexes in the DCG. I am nigh on certain that this pertains to the 'Debt Collection Guidelines' formerly issued by the now defunct OFT. Unfortunately, the old OFT website is now completely dead, so I can't check this out there. I have searched elsewhere online, but any copies I have found don't fit with the paragraph numbers quoted in the Consumer Credit Sourcebook. I am assuming that I
  15. I hope you are both right and we will all see soon enough. If it didn't happen, then I would have to declare democracy in this country, whatever little we have left of it, totally dead. Touch wood.
×
×
  • Create New...