Jump to content

Axiom99

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    166
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Axiom99

  1. I have a friend who had a 10k credit card debt and could not afford to keep up the payments so stopped paying. He endured all the fall out crap with phone calls letters threats etc and eventually he got a letter from the lender saying the lender could offer a discount for settlement. He called them and told them he could not afford the payments and that if they took him to court they would be no better off as he would still not be able to pay(he does not own a property) After long negotiations the lender accepted 2k as full and final settlement which he borrowed off a relative and is paying back on the drip. just a thought!
  2. There has been some fascinating information on [problem].com about the above named CMCs and many more and I am sure that the demise of some of the dodgier outfits has been at least partly if not wholly attributable to information on this site which has now disappeared for some reason. I know the site was hosted in North America and for this reason was still carrying posts about Cartel and their activities when Cartel was threatening legal action to websites and posters in the UK to suppress their release of information and this did indeed stop a lot of the truth about Cartel appearing on UK based websites including this one. [problem].com was not affected and continued to carry threads detailing many CMC failures/scams and I feel it is a real shame it has gone. I hope other [problem].com users see this and we can fnd a way to get together to continue the work which has been helping to sink such scams if not here then at least use this website as a rallying point to move on elsewhere. A
  3. Thanks I will have a good look at the info you have sent
  4. My daughter who is 19 and a student lives with me and mt 14 yr old son lives with my ex most of the time and spends about 6-7 days a month with me
  5. Hi Sequenci, Thanks for your comments. I had an MBNA card and was unable to keep up the payments and they obtained a CCJ and then a charge over a property owned jointly by me and my girlfriend. Optima legal are now chasing for repayment of the debt and threatening that they will apply for an order for sale on the property if I do not pay. I am out of work and relying upon my girlfriend but have no money to pay them- can they force the sale of a jointly ownned property to pay debts which are only the responsibility of one of the owners ie me?
  6. I have seen mentioned several times in other threads that lenders are now not able to obtain orders for sale on properties where they are pursuing an unsecured debts under 25k. Can anyone provide information as to if this actually true then how it came about,ie has there been a change in the law,is it just guidance and can anyone refer me to some supporting documentation. I have had a CCJ and charging order on my property and the solicitors for the lender are now threatening me with a charging order as I am out of work and can not pay them what they want. Please help
  7. I have a DN from Nationwide which states Date by which action is required :The payment is must reach your account within 14 days from the date of this default notice. Surely that is invalid as it does not allow any time for postage. Also it requires the full balance to be repaid not just the arrears does that also mean it is invalid?
  8. I thought that the time for posting was generally accepted as being 4 days as usually the DN is posted 2nd class but that the lender could argue for only 2 days as long as they could prove it was posted first class.Is that correct?
  9. Are you saying that where the date of the DN is a weekend it is assumed that the date of postage is the first business day after that and then there are 4 days for postage which would make the Friday of that week the day it was deemed received?
  10. I understand the case was heard in Manchester,can anyone help with any info about this?
  11. Thanks for the move I presume this is a more appropriate place for this problem
  12. This case was brought by a solicitor acting on a no win no fee basis and the contention was that the way the credit limit was described in the agreement contravened the 1974 CCA in that it was not specific about what the credit limit was or how it would be determined. The original action failed but it was appealed I believe,does anyone have any info?
  13. Thanks Caro will get onto it staright away and post here what happens
  14. Ok thanks so given the date can you determine whether they would have to produce a physical copy?
  15. The original credit card was taken out in June 2006,how is the date relevant? Also I have seen lots of posts from you and you obviously have a wealth of knowledge,is there any chance you can take a look at this other thread of mine it would be greatly appreciated. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/repossessions/253568-need-help-application-set.html
  16. Help!kicking myself for prevaricating now but have had lot of other problems going on and have not submitted N244 yet(solicitors did say they would deal with this but have not done so predictably!) I have now received Interim Charging order dated 7.05.2010 and the date for application to be heard is 16.06.2010. I hope I am not too late to still apply for set aside,can anyone please help with advice as to what to do next? Can any one please help with my question above ,starting to get very worried now about what to do next with this charging order situation.
  17. MBNA sent me a copy of my agreement in response to a CPR request and it has no signature,it just appears to be an application form. There is some doubt as to whether the original application was made online and they may try to argue that in this case if they can prove the application was made on line they would not have a signed document and therefore have no need to provide one . Can anyone help with advice particularly as to how things are regarding online applications and the need for a lender to provide a signed agreement in the event of legal action.
  18. If I remenber rightly the case you quote was cited by one of the pro CCK posters on the earlier thread and at that time the view was that this case did nothing to back up the 'debt purchase' model. Have to disagree about the debt buying thing being a more recent thing-Rankine was operating a roadshow last year (June/July)and there were people at one of those last July who had 'sold their debt months before then. They had the usual hassle from lenders and DCAs etc but none had been to court. Rankine seemed to rely upon the fact that rather than him prove why he could buy peoples debts others should prove why he can not do this. When people challenged his ability to wipe out debts for people this was his principal argument. He quotes the same argument many times on his website and allegedly has asked the OFT FSA MoJ etc to state which law he is breaking. From the fact that he is still going I would guess that is proving difficult as he is clearly getting up the noses of the OFT trading standards etc. But I keep wondering what has happened with all those people who paid him money. If they have not had a result why are they not complaining the way CCR and Ratio customers did?
  19. As far as I can determine CCK have been operating the same way since they started with the 'debt purchase' and the case has always been that when they 'buy' the debt the client stops paying the lender. Their licence was revoked by the MoJ a long time ago (middle of last year I think)and the line from BR was that they did not need an MoJ licence as they were not a CMC and they carried on as normal.I guess that begs the question as to why they had an MoJ licence in the first place This thread has been going since last year http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/239905-credit-card-killer-[problem].html Initially there were some guys posting in support of CCK but they seem to have disappeared now. As for numbers of clients they do not state on the website but other info mentions thousands of clients. The OFT announcement about the injunction says they believe that clients paid CCK a million pounds in fees. CCK charged 10% of the debt which would mean collectively CCK were supposedly dealing with 10 million pounds worth of debt. If the average individual debt was 5,000 pounds that would mean 2000 clients and if it was 10,000 pounds it would mean 1000 clients.
  20. What is confusing me is this. CCK has thousands of customers going back 18 months who have 'sold' him their debts. I would expect that the lenders would respond to someone claiming they had sold their debt to Rankine to ignore such claim and carry on chasing the original debtor. If thats the case and Rankine did not perform some how the debtor would get stuffed by the lender and would be pretty upset. So we would expect that there should be plenty of dissatisfied clients around and yet there have been no such posts on this site or on [problem].com which was at least partly reponsible for the demise of Cartel.On that site which discusses Ratio Money,Cartel,Redkite and other failed 'get rid of debt' outfits there is no shortage of ****ed off people.It makes me wonder why that is Could it be that the lenders for whatever reason are not pursuing these clients?
  21. Well it seems pretty conclusive that Rankine can not possibly do what he says and buy peoples debts but he seems to be carrying on doing just that from reading what he has posted on his website.
  22. Absolutely not I was very impressed by your post and sorry you may have thought my comments sarcastic. I am fascinated by this saga of the Rankines as to how they keep on going,taking money off people despite being decried by all and sundry and despite injunctions threats and the like. There are many forums where dissatisfied clients of CMC s etc slag off their CMC for not having done what they say. CCK claim to have thousands of satisfied customers,surely if there were some dissatisfied ones they would have found such forums and be slagging them off but I have found no evidence on any forums talking about CCK. How are they doing it?
  23. CCK always turn this round and claim that neither the OFT or anyone else can find a legal argument that says they CAN'T buy someones debts.
  24. Rankine has been at this for 18 months now,maybe he is just relying upon lenders not having the expertise to work this one out or the balls to take him on in court. From what I have read he could walk away tomorrow with a million quid in his pocket.
×
×
  • Create New...