Jump to content


BankFodder BankFodder


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Zodiac


Everything posted by IainHL

  1. Well, irrespective how late they may have sent out the default notice ("served by 1st class post"!), it is dated 25/01/2008, and thus would be deemed served on 29/01/2008 (2 working days after posting). But 14 days from then (which is the amount of time they have to allow you to rectify the default) would then be 12/02/2008. Oh dear, poor Close! Can you say "unlawful recission of contract"? The other problem is if the date of the agreement is not 15/03/2007, then how can they have given you on the default notice "sufficient information to identify the agreement"? Also, by what you have said they never actually sent you a termination notice (or delivered one with the repossesion agents)?
  2. The dictionary definition you have provided for stakeholder is interesting middenmess, and is somewhat different I believe to the meaning intended by the CML. There is a frequent usage of the word stakeholder in business these days that would have a meaning along the lines of "any interested parties in the matter at hand". I would think this is what the CML were trying to say!
  3. Although they really are just playing awkward and should send the information without signatures (after all they have been happy to send other correspondence to her address), it is probably easier to use SignGuard and give them her signature. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/digitalsignature.php. It costs £4.00 and produces an anti-tamper version of her true signature. Triton/NatWest cannot them claim that she hasn't signed the letters.
  4. bizniz, in the circumstances you find yourself in I would use the signature guard you can purchase from this site. It took a lot of finding (there used to be a link on the home page once): http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/digitalsignature.php. It costs £4.00 and produces an anti-tamper version of your true signature. Triton/NatWest cannot them claim that you haven't signed your letter.
  5. wbdfs, my understanding is that you bring the post/thread to the attention of the site team by clicking on the red triangle at the bottom left. I presume it brings up some form where you input why you are bringing it to their attention, ut I don't really want to click the triangle to find out, just in case it doesn't!
  6. I have experienced similar problems with RBS group (NatWest personal loan and Tesco personal loan), and Co-op (credit card). All of these have been on a debt management plan since late 2006, and all quickly reached the point of reporting me as being permanently 6 months in arrears on my credit report. NatWest had sent me a default notice, but refused to register this fact when I asked them to do so. In Autumn 2009 they admitted they could not find the agreement. I am currently trying to get them to agree a write-off or take me to court. Tesco had an agreement, but fortunately it is the smallest of all the debts and therefore the one I will settle first, meaning that the poor payment history will only hang around for 6 years after that point. Co-op shot themselves in the foot by lumbering on to sending a default notice and terminating, despite having an improperly executed agreement. That default is now recorded on my credit report, which is fine by me as I reckon (if you have many other defaults as I do) that one more default is less damaging than a 36 month payment history of permanently 6 months in arrears. As for what happens after 6 years. Well Experian specifically say a defaulted account is removed after 6 years. My debt management plan has a span of 12 years. So in late 2012/early 2013 (6 years from the defaults) I expect my credit report to get a lot tidier, even though I will still be on my debt management plan. Unless, that is, the creditors find some way of fudging the data to keep the account on there. After all they could decide in 2011 to issue another default notice just for the sake of it, since they don't have to take the action stated ("the following action may be taken..."). And that to me is the problem with the CRAs. The creditors seem to get away with reporting what they feel like, and the CRAs are on their side.
  7. Cashface, you are correct, as long as you keep on paying the minimum payments they will not be able to record anything negative with the CRAs. Also, merely making a CCA1974 ss.77-79 request for your credit agreements really shouldn't antagonise them, not lead to any negative action on their part, as long as you do keep on making the payments. And finally, as DD says, one application (hence credit report search) for a new card cannot be counted against you. I would emphasise as you apply that it is to use the balance transfer facility (hence I would probably do it on paper myself, with a covering letter), because in that way you would be more likely to pass the affordability part of the assessment. In your covering letter say that it is your intention when the balance is transferred to ask the existing card to reduce your creit limit (or even close the account if you can transfer all the balance). It would help here if you could find a company that doesn't just rely on plugging things into the computer and seeing what it says (that means avoiding HBoS). Anyone got any pointers on this front?
  8. You give up on what exactly? That no-one has answered a question you haven't asked (as far as I can see) on this thread? However I do notice an inconsistency in what you are saying. You keep saying your debt is settled. Yet in your last post you say that on your agreement it is annotated as "not collectable". Have you actually ever agreed with Welcome a full and final settlement for the debt? Do you have their letter agreeing to that, or a write-off of the debt?
  9. Kate, see this thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/m-cards/252697-if-helps-m.html.
  10. Hello there DMB. I have taken another look, and like I said yesterday they have not provided a document containing the original prescribed terms, therefore they have not satisfied your CCA 1974 s.78 request. You need to send them the account in dispute letter. You will find that in the templates library. NatWest will of course respond with the "no it isn't" letter, and Triton will step up the collection activity. It took from April until September in my case before I had a letter from Green & Co Solicitors (in-house solicitors for RBS/NatWest, based with Triton in Telford). I responded to them in October and they replied at the beginning of November saying that they had closed their file and I would be hearing directly from NatWest Card Services. Not having heard anything I tried prodding them for a response in January, but they ignored that letter. I have in this past week sent in a claim for the refund of nearly £400 in charges and interest to see what effect that has. Good luck. Do let us know how you get on.
  11. If you did indeed receive a Termination Notice, that is it. Account terminated. No wonder they wouldn't accept your Voluntary Termination, since they had already terminated there was no agreement for you to voluntarily terminate. Understand? Similarly they cannot issue a second Default Notice, since there is no active agreement, expressed far more eloquently by BRW in one of his posts. I believe you have 2 choices now, sit and wait for them to take you to court, or start action against them yourself. postggj is the expert on this, if you haven't already start your own thread and PM postggj. Oh, and don't pay them a penny more!
  12. My understanding is that opinion is incorrect. It is the defective DN that makes their subsequent termination unlawful recission of contract. The point is you won't have to prove when you received the letter. It is up to Welcome to prove they sent it, their computer system will show when it was dated. Since they didn't use a tracked service it is deemed as 2 (1st class) or 4 (2nd class) working days after the date of posting. Personally I just write the received date on all the letters I receive for good measure. But all that is moot anyway. The regulations are quite clear that the default notice must contain an actual date, and that date must be at least 14 days after service. The use of "14 days" in itself, and completely, renders the DN defective.
  13. Hello again DMB, Firstly you need to do a better editing job on the images in these two links: http://i978.photobucket.com/albums/a...248/img030.jpg http://i978.photobucket.com/albums/a...248/img035.jpg The labels you have used to cover your name and address are transparent enough to the scanner that the details are showing through. Also one of them still has "Dear Mr B..." at the top. Now the good news. I cannot see that they have supplied the original terms, certainly I could not see the prescribed terms on the application form/agreement. I will take a harder look tomorrow, dinner is calling me now! So though they are correct in what they are saying about what they have to do to comply with a s.78 request, they have failed because the original terms are missing. And here Waksman is your friend (Carey v HSBC [2009] EWHC 3417 (QB)). This is pretty much exactly where they started with me a year ago. They last wrote to me in November 2009. I have been trying to prod them into action since. I will post more tomorrow.
  14. Mark, My opinion, based like you, on much reading around the site. You can ignore the letter, it is just waffle, pretty much like any random DCA letter trying to get you to contact them. The Default Notice is defective. (The use of the term "14 days" instead of an actual date 14 days after service, which would be deemed to be the 12th as 4 working days after it got into the postal system by second class post.) Sit tight and wait for them to take some action that can be construed as termination by Welcome because it involves them asking for the full sum outstanding before it is due. Then write to them accepting that termination. The fact that your case is in dispute and with FOS probably means Welcome should not have sent you a default notice. But then do you really expect Welcome to be able to tell their a*** from their e**** in these matters? When you write to them accepting the termination may be the point at which you wish to point out the defective default notice and try to begin negotiations with them. There is an argument that you should leave such information until later in the process. If your case is with FOS you will already know this is a slow "game". I wrote the CCA request to my creditors almost exactly a year ago, thinking everything would be over in 3 to 4 months. Here I am a year later only paying 4 out of the 8, and still writing letters as necessary. Now my advice to people would be to be prepared for the long haul, stick to your guns, keep writing letters as required (whether to fend off the next DCA or to try and persuade the OC to actually take you to court), and ultimately be prepared to wait the 6 years until the debt is statute barred.
  15. Hello DMB, it looks to me like you are in a very similar position to me (and today happens to be the one year anniversary of when I first wrote to NatWest with my CCA request!). Unfortunately I cannot read your attachments because the new work content filter is blocking access to Photobucket. I will endeavour to take a look from home over the next couple of days and get back to you.
  16. Also, surely, if CapQuest had really purchased the debt from Sainsburys they should have sent a Notice of Assignment? Since I don't recall reading anything about akuma having received a NoA, then again they are being economical with the truth. Aren't CapQuest in reality just trying to collect a debt on behalf of Sainsbury's?
  17. I subscribe to CreditExpert from Experian and check my report each month. It has disappeared sometime between 8th February and 8th March. Point taken slick. However I have 8 threads relating to my unsecured loans/credit cards to start, and 2 about secured loans. That is a very large amount of scanning of letters to do, and the task seems rather daunting. A project for the Easter holidays perhaps? And then there are the 6 different bank charges claims...
  18. db, excuse me for having to ask, but what does the acronym LSO stand for (since I presume we are not talking about the London Symphony Orchestra here!)?
  19. Yes, I too got my letter from Gothia/Red Castle this week. And this is despite having written to M&S asking them to do me the courtesy of dealing with the matter themselves and not to pass me round the merry-go-round of DCAs. One thing I have just noticed today though is that the M&S Credit Card has disappeared from my Experian Credit Report!
  20. Ah, that old trick of sending 7 day letters 2nd class to make you panic into doing something because you don't have much time left before their deadline. It seems to be a common ploy of the debt collection industry. Strange isn't it how they never respond within the deadline when you write to them and ask for a response within 7 days, sending it 1st class of course so they have a reasonable chance? (Mind you it doesn't seem to matter if you specify 7, 14, 21 or 28 days, they just reply when they feel like it, if at all.)
  21. ieuan, please understand I wasn't saying that you "would be on the wrong end of the stick" if NatWest decided to take court action over the overdraft. I was merely point out that your defence would be complicated by the fact that you would be defending the action on the overdraft by referencing the lack of agreement on a secured loan. All is possible with a well constructed defence. Elsa makes a very good point, however. So, have they been helpling themselves to an unauthorised overdraft, or is the current account still below its limit? Also I note that you say they have stated they will stop all debits to his current account with the exception of the transfer to the loan account, and are wondering what that means. Well to me it means they will keep on taking the money. With a little inside knowledge that I have on NatWest's internal systems (ex-wife used to work for them), although you sign a direct debit instruction for payments to the loan account it is not set up as a true direct debit on NatWest's systems. Nor is it a standing order. Instead it is a transfer (think codes of DD, SO and TR, take a look on the bank statements), and I am sure you can see the difference. (Of course this is a number of years ago, and it is possible systems have changed since then.) And of course not being a true DD you can't really control it, or have recourse to the DD guarantee. So they will continue to service the loan.
  22. Looks good to me Titney. I don't think there is anything more you need to add to the substance of your letter. I would end it something like this: Please confirm to me in writing that you have received, understood and actioned the points made in this letter. I look forward to receiving your written response within the next 14 days.
  23. In that case I would be contacting the CRAs to dispute the entries, informing them that the bank have acknowledged that they do not have the credit agreement. It will be interesting to see how they respond to that.
  24. Collections departments/DCAs will perform searches on your credit report to get a feel for your general financial position. Of course without a signed credit agreement they have absolutely no authority to perform any such search at all! You may wish to write to them pointing this out and instructing them not to perform any further searches. They will probably ignore you. Are these showing as "unrecorded enquiry"? If so your crumb of comfort on this is that these don't count adversely against you, and aren't revealed to anyone else searching your file.
  • Create New...