Guys...you just got to grab every opportunity at my age!! Ok, am unsubscribing from this thread suitably scolded!! ;-)

lol It was intended as a cheeky post to diffuse the tension on this thread Mark...no offence intended...you know, women fancy men in uniforms and all that!! Sorry if it came across the wrong way!!

Yeah, lets not rise to the bait...I was enjoying it more when we were letting him rant!! lol 24 years of naval training eh Mark?? You're not tall, dark, handsome and single by any chance?!!!!

No, consolidation loans are rarely a good idea and suggests that he has or had run up several debts. If you haven't known him that long then it's difficult to intervene. However, you could always try and broach the subject of budgeting I guess. The point is, if your partner is having financial difficulties, and his expenditure exceeds his income, then he should be doing something about it now, such as trying to get interest and other charges frozen. The longer he leaves it, the worse it will become. Then again, there is always the possibility that he's comfortable paying out £300 on the loan. It really depends how this equates to his income and how much disposable income (if any) he has left over every month.

You need to get something in writing to them Extrobe...they sound so incompetent!! You should be able to check online what their charges are for the different bands so that you can find out what band you've actually being paying. Let us know how you get on!

Have a read of letter 2 on Melbel's thread Andy...unbelievable response from Apex...worry no more if this is the only argument they are able to put forward regarding enforceability!! http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/231975-apex-credit-have-bought-3.html#post2834986

Hi Mel...the first letter you can just ignore. The second letter...well, let's just say that she is talking out of her posterior end!! I'm still not sure what she's trying to say exactly. Yes, your agreement would have been regulated at the time by CCA74 and associated legislation. However, it has been superseded by 2006 although some of the changes cannot be enforced retrospectively and are specified as such. Nonetheless, CCA74, section 78 states: Am I right in assuming that she is trying to say that because of this clause, (which, I hasten to add, only relates to a consumer requesting a copy of their agreement and not to the format or content) they don't have to have the prescribed term "credit limit" in the original agreement as it would have been nil at the time of opening? I am so astonished by the ignorance of this reply!!!

You need to contact your local authority to check this out as, if the banding wasn't lowered and it's just their records that are wrong, then you will undoubtedly get stung for the balance later along the line. Do you happen to know if any of your neighbours on the new build appealed against the banding as well?

No Carly...as you say, it depends upon the length of the loan and also the interest rate that is being charged. Do you have any idea why he had a loan in the first place? Sometimes, it's better to be up front about things when you are in a relationship. Tell him you came across the letter and read it as you were unsure of what it was. On the flip side of the coin, there is also the worrying aspect about your boyfriend not being totally honest with you about his financial affairs either.

Well trained Sod'Em!!

Both myself and Andydd received the pre-litigation letter and then, on the same day, after the 10 days was up, just received another letter stating that they might send one of their doorstep people around. As Andy said in the thread link below, what happened to all the court action?? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/231975-apex-credit-have-bought-3.html#post2817409 I personally felt that a lot of Caggers jumped in far too early with the CCA requests as you can normally ignore DCA's for a significant period. As you have suggested Flubber, you are well within your rights to ask them to prove that the debt has been assigned to them and I do feel that Apex should be challenged on this point as they obviously produced the assignment notices that were supposedly from Egg. As I've said before, I think it would be foolish of Apex to commence any litigation on the earlier agreements whilst PT's case is pending. PS...Regarding the CCA, it really depends what they and you are referring to. The one with your signature on will probably be genuine. What you are querying, I believe, is what is supposed to be the current terms and conditions, with Citi's address on. This has been formatted to look like an enforceable agreement with all of the prescribed terms.

I believe statute of limitations is 12 years for a mortgage and not the usual 6 years. (However, it seems that the 12 year period relates to capital and 6 years to interest.) Just don't acknowledge the debt or the time limit will start all over again I believe. Were you intending to submit a claim regarding the mis-selling of the mortgage? I'm slightly confused... Here's a mortgage shortfall fact sheet at the link below...

Sorry, but this thread has made me smile....isn't it just great to know that Caggers are having such a positive influence on the world by cleaning up the credit industry!!

Strange Iain...normally you end up with 2 entries, one for the OC and one for the DCA!! However, it seems that M&S haven't sold the debts on but have just employed these monkey's to try and collect for them. I checked my report for free with annualcreditreport at the begining of March and my M&S card was showing on there....how long have you been in dispute with them? (Sorry Cleo if this is going off thread a little but the same may apply to you also!! )

I didn't think so either as the counterclaim should stand as a claim in its own rights...and you have to pay a court fee to make a counter claim. Interesting to know if what Donkey says is correct...that by discontinuing they are effectively admitting the counterclaim.

Well, to be honest, I see this as more of an health and safety issue for the company to deal with, as I am sure that it is fairly forseeable that their employees will be subject to abuse, in many different guises. As part of any risk assessment, it should be standard practice to assess what can be done to minimise risk to employees. Acting promptly to cease calls upon receipt of such notifications should be top of the list, especially as it has no or minimal implementation costs. If I had the unfortunate job of working for such a low life company (and I appreciate that some may have little choice in the matter) I would want to know that my employer was taking all reasonable precautions to ensure a safe system of work. Therefore, I see the low down employees beef being with their company and not the poor unfortunate person they have called to harrass.

Sorry, but whenever a third party is involved I believe that it is only sensible to advise your insurance company as you have to protect yourself from the very actions you are now experiencing. I'm guessing that she has received a rather hefty quote for repairing the damage to her nice shiny jeep and is now trying to offload the blame. Nonetheless, if nobody was injured then the Police won't be interested. Of course, in the mean time, the other driver may suddenly have experienced whip lash and you may also be facing a personal injury claim. I honestly don't mean to sound harsh but you've paid your insurance premiums to deal with exactly this sort of mess and you need to contact them asap to inform them of the incident.

What is sick is the continual harrassment by these companies, especially when no enforceable CCA exists and also they have been told not to call yet continue to do so. Many have been brought to the brink of suicide by such actions and regrettably some have taken their own lives. I am classed as a vulnerable person, due to my disability, and yet Apex continue to call....now that is sick!!

Regarding F&F's, I'm sure I read on another thread that they won't accept less than 80%....but that may have been Egg directly...

That in itself won't necessarily stop them from pursuing the debt though JonCris, albeit not through the courts. I have it in writing from M&S that my agreement is unenforceable and am now onto DCA number 3!! I believe that Link are going to discontinue and I would be stinging them for as much wasted costs as reasonably possible.

Nah...you don't want to be doing that!! As has happened on other threads, I believe they are going to discontinue regardless and this is simply a damage limitation exercise. As you recognise, this is clearly designed to avoid paying you wasted costs. Don't sign would be my advice...but I think you've got their number anyway Emandcole...congratulations!!

I think you normally have to allow them a reasonable time such as 7 days to update their records to be honest Flubber. I imagine Apex are overloaded with correspondence at the moment. It took them about 7 to 10 days to stop calling me so I wouldn't waste your time or money just yet!! EDIT...FORGET THAT!! THE BARSTEWARDS JUST CALLED AGAIN!!!

Hi Cleo...just to let you know that my unenforceable M&S account has also been passed to Gothia / Red Castle...no doubt similar letters will ensue!!

Just another update for anyone following and/or in a similar position. After letting Philips exhaust themselves with their threatograms I finally found the time to tell them that they were in breach of OFT guidance by threatening court action when they know they are not in a position to proceed. Collect Direct (aka Improved Financial Services) and Philips have now disappeared off the scene and the account has been passed to Gothia / Red Castle who are acting directly on behalf of M&S. No doubt another similar barrage of letters will follow although I'll let them run their course before responding, yet again.

I used to think the same about Link as they weren't a million miles away from me. It's up to you Zhanzhibar but I personally sent them the standard letter telling them not to visit or call. If you think about it logically, it costs them money to send someone out and, in reality, I imagine their success rate with Caggers in particular, is not very promising!!