Hi Beachy,

Sorry to hear about your loss and I hope you and your OH are getting a chance to have some time to yourselves tonight and tomorrow all being well.

Sounds to me like the BC ignore the dispute merry-go-round is ongoing with you also.

All has went quiet here this last two days which feels strange! No post and no calls.

Even CAP1 has finally stopped calling me since the weekend...must have been my CPR letter to Miss Ellie sent in size 32 font since she has thrice previously ignored it! (or had trouble reading it - must have been illegible and unenforceable then....)

Take care of your family and let these buggers wait on you.

meerkat x

well done!

Another win for the little people!

Meerkatsmimm,

 

It may be worth altering your interest in your home if you have greater debts than your partner and you trust them.

Can you go into this in a bit more depth please Crapstone?

We had thought about trying to gift the equity in our home to our little girl, although again not sure how to do that.

Hi Guys,

This gets even stranger!

Mum received her SAR finally, and it turns out she did take out another application for a new card, in 2002. She has no memory of this, but she has been unwell for a long time, so im not surprised she didnt remember this.

Ill upload the 'application form' tomorrow - and it is definately an application form.

No prescribed terms and ILLEGIBLE! They actually included three copies in her SAR so bad was the quality. And not hard to read - the T&C's are almost impossible to make out - although I can just about see that there are no Prescribed terms .

Its gets stranger.

The card for the application form uploaded inthe post above, was closed in 2000 - My mum wrote them three letters after the PPI payout, asking them to close the card. She actually sent the card back to them and the SAR shows copies of all three letters asking for the account to be closed. Further on in the SAR, NW's own statements show this account to have been closed.

My only thoughts for this having been sent to my mum in response to her CCA request, was that they knew it was a better quality 'application' than the one they held for the card she now has, and maybe it would fool her into thinking as a lay person, that this was enforceable.

Oh, her current credit card must have been replaced at some stage - although there doesnt seem to be any notes to show this - because the credit card number she has now is different from even the most recent application form they provided.

Like I said I will get the other application form up tomorrow, but given that it has no prescribed terms and is clearly illegible (sorry!) and clearly an application form, how should she proceed?

How can they even try to enforce this in court?

She was today with her doctor completing paperwork for another creditor and her doctor has stated that he will assist where possible with providing the creditors with evidence of her mental illness and the fact that she will most likely never be able to work again.

How best can I put this to them in a letter?

My thoughts were to state that given her state of health and also the fact that they have no agreements enforceable by a court, would they consider putting this account to zero.

Too basic?

Thanks, meerkat x

Go into debt collection industry forum and click new thread, any then as much info as possible without giving anything personal away.

CCA is your consumer credit agreement and you can send a letter requesting this information from your debt collection agency that is hounding you. It is part of a process towards sorting your situation out.

Go for it as DD stated also!

meerkat x

Hi YM,

Try not to panic - firstly, welcome to CAG - you will get all the support and help you need from the folks on here.

The best advice I can give now, is to start a thread on each debt in the relevant section and give as much detail as possible (though no personal details of your own).

This will ensure you get the best advice quickly and you will see the responses to your own threads broken down, for each debt - hopefully offering you some clarity also.

CCAing the creditors is one way to begin to deal with things, but like I said, start the threads first and the responses will follow.

Your best move was coming here, so try and relax!

meerkat x

"only 2.5K is joint":shock: Now the penny drops It's plain to see what the crafty sods are up to I must say I was suspicious of their 'cooperative' nature as usually they want blood.

 

If you decide to go for a VCO & assuming it's in joint names, only allow it to cover the share of the property owned by the debtor - & exclude the joint debt entirely agree to pay it monthly until cleared

Exactly, they were very quick to default on this joint account, within 5 days of it going over the agreed reducing overdraft and only by £18.

Dont know how we can seperate the accounts though, because they will most probably state how can we find the money to pay one, when we cant find the extra money to pay the others we hold with them?

Hi Lexis,

Thanks for posting up.

We did contact most of our creditors in the last two weeks asking them to write the debt off on the basis of lack of agreement/ lack of presecribed terms etc., but not on the basis you have stated, which is certainly worth doing.

None have yet replied to our original letters, so we will await those responses and then depending on that, send a letter like you suggest -it cant do any harm!

meerkat x

Hey, keep the chin up. I'm new here, but what I have read from some of the guys on here, there is nearly always something that can be done to help things.

 

Good luck.

Thanks Debtcontrol,

I'm just so frustrated - want to bury my head and make it all go away - there is so much going on aside from debts that the debts aren't getting dealt with and I just want them gone! Would have gone bankrupt only I'm afraid I'd have a forced sale anyway - i know its only a house but its the only stable thing at the minute and mentally we just NEED to keep it.

Meerkat xx

i can see the point you make here , however, if that condition was inserted into the clause and the idea was that NO payments would be made until the house was eventually sold that could be go-er

 

however, if it was entered into on the basis that the debtor was going to make regular monthly payments and he then defaulted on them down the line i would imagine the creditor may well seek relief from the clause

Hi DD, Kraken & others,

The bank (not dca) offering a VCA, has stated that they would charge no interest, ask for no monthly payments and would not expect repayment until re-mortgage or sale of property. So essentially we would have 12.5k charge sitting on our property but nothing else to worry about with regards repayments or DCA's in this particular case.

It seems like a great offer on the face of it as it would be 20% of our debt gone - and no real reprecussions as we would intend to pay all debts anyway. However, the property is jointly owned/mortgaged, and only 2.5k of this debt is joint - the rest belongs to me solely. The majority of this debt is in the form of a credit card, which to date the bank have not produced a valid agreement for.

So then the argument is - why would we give a VCA to a bank for a debt that we MIGHT get set aside by the courts due to an unenforceable agreement. To top that off the other 2 accounts - joint and mine solely are overdrafts and we are fighting to get back charges on them so realistically we'd be putting a charge on our property for debts the bank might have to right off anyway because of the charges added.

I suppose for me and Mr Meerkat our home is our castle - we spent money on it, toiled in the garden and envision seeing our little meerkat growing up here.

Before we ended up in this situation we considered seeking a further advance on our mortgage to cover the debts - so we'd have been paying off £600 per month for the next 25 years £180k for a £80k debt - and given where we are now, we'd have struggled to make the payments and would have been forced to sell anyway. So the way we look at it is that if we can get VCA's on our terms with no prospect of a forced sale then we're quids in. We've technically still borrowed the money against the house, we can (afaik) make lump sum repayments off the balance, and we have no monthly repayments to make and the credit is all gone and we'll not be being chased anymore! Yeah for us!

But then what if the agreements are unenforceable.......what if the judge grants CO on his terms regardless....all the what if's are slowly driving Mr Meerkat round the bend and there is so much else going on aside from financial difficulties that this would be one less thing to worry about!

Thanks all for keeping with this - I'm losing my mind, and the will to live to be honest...

meerkat xx

Hey DD,

Thanks for that - is that the post Sequenci put up as he sent it to me directly also?

It clarifies things, but like I said, until this morning I believed due to our daughter being in the family home and an infant, and also due to the fact this was all unsecured debt until they would secure it through a charging order, that our home was safe.

That they could swing CCJ's and CO's from the ceilings but that they couldnt force a sale.

Rare that it is, it obviously still happens which is frightening.

Thanks DD,

Sorry for going over things so much - its not making much sense at present and we have alot of other things going on personally that are adding to the confusion.

meerkat x

Yes, but if we get it written into a contract as part of a VCO that they would oppose the 3rd, 4th charge on the property.

We give away a small part of our overall debt to be secured against our home, with the intention that this 2nd charge blocks any subsiquent charges by refusing them.

Could that be over ruled by the court?

not quite sure what you are getting at

 

you and the Creditor can agree what you like between you but it will not be binding on any of your other creditors

 

having one come along later and start court action to get your arrangement set aside would i imagine get quite complicated

 

dont forget also that when your first mortgagors (who may also be your current bankers) get wind of what is happening you could find an y overdrafts being looked at- )

Sorry for the confusion DD, and thanks for sticking with me on this one.

Basically I mean, can a judge over-rule the 1st or 2nd charge holders of my property, should they refuse to agree to any subsiquent 3rd or 4th creditors attempt at a charging order?

I say this because the creditor asking for 2nd charge wouldnt force the sale and I can have that in writing.

Not worried about bank as they arent linked with my mortgage, Thank God!

Thanks for the template also, it certainly would help for structure.

Only thing is the letter doesnt take into account the forthwith judgement, which we could have granted, effectively asking for the full payment within a certain timeframe, otherwise a charging order would follow. If the forthwith judgement is requested by the creditor, there isnt much we can do.

We dont know what to do for the best, although most are stating not to agree to the the VCO. Our home is everything though.

Thanks DD,

What if we asked the 2nd charge holder that we were giving the VCO to write into the contract that they wouldnt agree to any further charges, unless we agreed first?

If that was done can the court overrule it?

The one seeking the VCO has the only joint debt out of all of our creditors.

Guys thanks for all replying.

Murphy already signed that, thanks for bringing it onto the thread for others though.

Payback, thank you for the link I will have a read shortly.

DD I probably am worrying too much, but we dont want to run the risk of losing our home over this unsecured debt and if by voluntarily securing some of it, that it offers us some protection against other more unreasonable creditors, then we would give it ago.

Kraken, as you say, the creditor in question stated that it would be part of the VCO that they would never seek to force this order to be paid out and the only time that it would become applicable is through the sale of the house or remortgage - neither seem likely.

I know the VCO is a get out of jail free card for the banks, it means they have none of the work to do, and they effectively get handed the value of the debt in a sling. However, I think if thought about and offered correctly, it could prevent other creditors who are unreasonable and who would want to force a sale from either getting the charge in the first place or not even trying.

Can anyone clarify if a creditor who has a priority charge can refuse to allow subsiquent charges to be placed - and if so, can a judge overrule this?

meerkat x

Hey DD,

Thats my question I guess. I mean all of our debt is unsecured CC debt.

I understand secured would be different and that lots of people are losing their homes everyday due to mortgage repossesion or defaulting on secured loans.

But this is all unsecured, and one of our creditors has made it clear that they would never seek to force an order for sale on the basis of unsecured lending that they get a charge off the back of.

However, what if one of our other creditors did try? Would the other debts we have simply have to agree with the judge and take a piece of anything that is left (or take a piece pro-rata)?

If one of our creditors were to be granted a voluntary charge by us, could we haave written into any agreement that we would want them to refuse to give any other creditor permission to get a subsiquent charge, and would the judge allow this?

So after a mortgage (1st charge), voluntary charge (2nd charge), another creditor or creditors tried to get 3rd, 4th, 5th etc. I understand that those in line in front who already have a charge can refuse, but would that stop dead any other charges being granted by any other creditor?

Or could the judge overrule the refusal and grant anyway?

(This is an important one for us - meerkat x)

Thanks guys,

That has reassured me a bit (feel like I went back nearly a month upon reading that post this morning), but in which instances would a judge grant an order for sale, if a minor was at home?

If its very rare that it happens, why would any judge feel the need to do it?

Thanks,

meerkat x

Seriously guests, join in or log-off - we can see you!

Hi Guests, dont you know its rude to lurk....

You should join up and join in!

It seems like you have a few creditors so you need to address them pro-rata with what you can afford even if it is only £1. Keeping them all in the frame makes it less likely that one of them will be granted a charging order as it will be at the disadvantage of the others.

 

Don't rely on the fact that having a child will influence the court to not allow enforcement of a charging order or that it will be included as a term.

 

How much equity do you have compared to your debts? Are you tenants in common or joint tenants? Are the debts in joint names?

Hi Crapstone,

You are scaring me now as I had been led to believe by many, including site team and some of my creditors, that they WOULDNT get an order for sale through the courts on the basis that my child was under 18 and still at home.

Can you back that statement up with some evidence please?

I mean, this is all unsecured debt, not anything to do with mortgages or secured loans.

We have negligable equity, if anything in the property. Even if the house could be sold tomorrow for a good price, it would amount to no more than 1/4 of all the debt we owe - if that.

All our creditors are up to date with our situation and we talk to them all (even though some choose now to listen) at least twice a month.

well i don't know where you are getting that information from- these are unsecured debts and the court will take no account of what property you own

 

if you are struggling to make payments and provide a I & E and proposals to pay commensurate with those that CCCS or payplan would produce the chances are overwhelmingly tht you will be given time to pay

 

obviously if the debt is VERY large and your proposals wil mean that you wil still be repaying th dent in 60 years the court might take a different view but they a re realistic and they know that in time peoples finances improve and they also know that the plaintiff may come back at a later date and ask for increased payments if the debotrs finances have improved

Hey DD,

It was one of the site team off CAG that made this statement to me about quite a large number of creditors are asking for and getting Forthwith judgements. In fairness, it wasnt made clear if that was for secure or unsecure debts and ive added the bit about the property from my own research.

Our debts are pretty high (all over 5k to each creditor) and being on benefits at present would mean any repayment schedule would take our lifetime to repay at the £1 we currently pay (and beyond probably).

We do of course hope and will do all we can to try to change our circumstances, but they are what they are now. I can only hope any DJ will look mercifully on us if and when our day(s) in court come.

meerkat x

Hi BankFodder,

I hear you on the Voluntary Charge front - just seems like such a good option on the face of it if it was one less creditor snapping at our heels - or in this case 3 of 15 individual accounts we are trying to get sorted - 20% of our outstanding debt.

The only thing stopping us taking this 'easy way out' is that we know the charges are more than likely to come back our way, plus to date the credit card debt they are also offering to encompass in the VC has yet to be seen to have a valid CA, and was terminated when full payment was requested in a default!

We have until mid July to get back to them Re the voluntary charge so we are 'pondering' our response.

Is it right that we'll have to fight for the other charges that were levied to the account prior to us becoming a hardship case?

Meerkat xx

p.s. think i've been refunded the other charges since we have been considered a hardship case - refunded to account we can no longer access and they then in turn levied more charges!

Hello guest!

All our charges are after 2001, yes.