As you doubtlessly know, the current situation in the United Kingdom is that when a party purportedly defaults on a mortgage, loan facility or similar, the aggrieved party, issues one warning and then generally after one month, issues a default notice which is registered at one or more of the central registries, an example being Experian. The purportedly aggrieved party having undertaken this action is under no legal obligation to follow up their action in the courts and they may leave the matter in abeyance. This frequently leaves the 'borrower' in a position where they have to instigate an action in the County or High Court to resolve the matter and so clear their name. The bringing of such action is now especially difficult as the resources of legal aid are no longer available except in the rarest circumstances. Even when successful, the notice concerning the default remains on the books of the central registry for a period of six years unless it is removed by the aggrieved party. Recently, there has arisen the habit of re-issuing default notices before the end of the limitation period, a six year arbitrary term, thus reinstating and prolonging the original claim, again without reference to due law. On occasion, debt collection agencies have been marking debtors credit files; possibly without properly assigned debts or armed with 'sold on debt'; they have been changing the date of the debt to the date they purchased the debt and thereby falsifying the initial start date of the registration on the central agencies books so defying the Statute of Limitations. The problem may be compounded by the facility now offered by the central registries of 'no footprint', so one has no idea as to who has accessed personal data thus ignoring the Data Protection Act. There is a prevalence for lenders; without due care; to scatter default notices like confetti, to knowingly use fear and intimidation, thus obviating their own responsibilities. In the United Kingdom there are thousands; if not tens of thousands; of people who have fallen foul of this ignominious facility of default registration thereby disenfranchising a large segment of the populace. The matter can be further complicated in the High Court when the plaintiff is of limited means or is not armed with ATE (after the event) insurance because counsel for the defence; at the initial court hearing; merely states that the plaintiff has no means of paying the costs of the case should they lose and the judge will then generally strike out the action. The days when a 'litigant in person' could go to the High Court and plead their case are now gone, that is unless they possess substantial assets. Further, it is most unlikely that any 'litigant in person' would be able to access ATE insurance. So there is no redress for a person of limited means to action a party in the High Court unless assisted by Pro Bono or CFA (no win, no fee) help and our solicitors/barristers rarely work on these principles. Possible relevant examples of four previous cases: In Kapohraror v Woolwich Building Society (1996) The claimant was awarded £5,500, the amount being £1,000 for the damage caused by the default and £4,500 being the value of the default. Lord Justice Evans said at page 124 "The credit rating of individuals is as important for their personal transactions, including mortgages and hire purchase as well as banking facilities, as it is for those who are engaged in trade, and it is notorious that central registers are now kept. I would have no hesitation in holding that what is in effect a presumption of some damage arises in every case in so far as this is a presumption of fact." In King v British Linen and Co (1897) In Wilson v United Counties Bank (1919) In Richard Durkin v DSG Retail and HFC Bank (2007)

We all have a chum or two, it is merely a small favour to ask. Petition to: Regulate the UK's Credit Reference Agencies. | Number10.gov.uk Email them.

Write, never never ring!

Write and tell them not to add any further charges to the account. Also, contest all the amounts that they have added to the account and that you were unable to monitor the account as you were abroad as a student studying. Offer them the original debt of £20 in full and final settlement and as an unemployed student it is all that you can afford and that you will pay the £20 demand at £5 per month. You have now made a legal offer in an attempt to resolve the dispute.

1/ Before the Event (BTE) or After the Event (ATE) legal expenses insurance. http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/newsrelease231007a.htm Research shows low awareness of before the event legal expenses insurance 23 October 2007 Research published today by Ministry of Justice reveals that less than one in four consumers have heard of either Before the Event (BTE) or After the Event (ATE) legal expenses insurance. Legal Expenses Insurance (LEI) provides the policyholder with the cost for legal fees in the event that they become involved in litigation. It is a relatively inexpensive mechanism for resolving a range of problems and legal disputes. The research report produced by FWD reveals that there is a considerable lack of information about the product both in the public domain in general and at the point of sale. Awareness among lower socio-economic groups (C2DE) is particularly low even though this group appears to be more likely to need to use a BTE product. The report also reveals that despite low awareness overall market penetration of the product has increased to 59% of the population (this compares with 50% penetration revealed by Mintel in their report published in December 2006). The research estimates that 28m adults currently own the product, most as an add on to another insurance policy. Welcoming the findings, Justice Minister Bridget Prentice said: The report gives us an insight into the current state of the BTE insurance market. Whilst more and more people now have the product, they don't appear to know how to use it. This is particularly true of the more vulnerable members of society. BTE insurance is important because it provides people with a means of getting advice and assistance when trying to resolve disputes. I would encourage insurance industry bodies and consumer groups to try and deal with this problem Other findings show: Legal Expenses Insurance cover is often fragmented or even duplicated. Due to lack of awareness many consumers are not aware that they have BTE insurance The market is likely to expand over the coming years increasing the number of consumers in this position The report recommends a number of steps that insurance industry bodies and consumer's groups- such as the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and Association of British Insurers (ABI)- should take forward. These include: Agreeing ways of promoting LEI and providing more information about the product both in general terms and at the point of purchase (including communicating its benefits more widely). Developing ways to encourage policy holders to read their policy documents Changing the name of Legal Expenses Insurance to something consumers are more likely to understand. One suggested alternative is 'legal protection' The report also recommends that employers provide LEI to employees Additionally, Housing Associations could provide LEI for tenants Officials at the Ministry of Justice have been discussing these recommendations with the FSA, ABI, Housing Corporation and employers groups to examine how these recommendations could be taken forward. Notes to Editors 1. 'The Market for BTE Legal Expenses Insurance: A research report for the Ministry of Justice', by Oona McDonald, Ian Winters and Mike Harmer 2. Until now the only other independent survey of the Legal Expenses Insurance market was published by Mintel in December 2006. 3. BTE insurance products have been available in the UK since 1974. The research report shows that 93% of all households have home buildings insurance in place; 78% have home contents Insurance; 4. The structure of the BTE market in the UK is complex. It is sold in a variety of ways usually as an add on to motor or household insurance. It is also sometimes sold attached to travel insurance. 5. The vast majority of BTE products are sold through intermediaries consisting of national brokers, broker chains and regional brokers. 6. For more information contact Zoë Campbell, Ministry of Justice Press Office, 020 7210 8695 Household Insurance Click link to open in new window. 2/ Legal expenses insurance report http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/legal-exp-ins-report.htm Legal expenses insurance report Date: 23 October 2007 This report explores the current state of the legal expenses insurance market and future trends with a view to promoting 'before the event' (BTE) legal expenses insurance so that more people have access to legal advice and assistance. The research for the report was done by Dr Oonagh McDonald, Ian Winters and Mike Harmer, of Fwd thinking communications. Full report (PDF 0.92mb 76 pages) Chapter 1 - 4 (PDF 0.24mb 58 pages) Appendices (PDF 0.69mb 18 pages) Related information Conditional fee agreements Civil procedure rules Civil proceedings costs Claims management regulations

Thank you again cerberusalert that link was very helpful indeed I will call their solicitor tomorrow and tell them the pitfalls they face with their charging order route and see what they say to my debt affordability plan. Suggest you only deal with them via paperwork.

I cannot help you as to information concerning unregulated loans. I would suggest though, that you make an official complaint to the police, ask for the incident to be logged and get the name/s number/s of the police officers involved, etc., etc.. This could be used in a counterclaim, any judge would take a very dim view on this kind of going-on. The fact that this happened in the Waitrose car park may also have legal implications. Check the two articles, you might be covered by insurance for this debarcle. About CFA's? - No Win No Fee Clavis General Debt Issues - Page 4 - The Consumer Forums

Thanks 42man, Have yet to find your PM button. Tried to change heading on CFA's to add (No win, no fee) as I realise that the abreviation CFA is not generally known. Twenty plus years since I did any serious work on the law. Naturally 'all change'. The two second posts are included as it appears that litigation insurance is widespread, generally hidden away in the small print of the most mundane insurance covers, i.e. household, life policies, etc. You might want to post copies of these elsewhere, I would suggest that all your 'customers' need to double check existing paperwork. Apologises if this is all old hat, thanks again, Clavis.

Legal expenses insurance report http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/legal-exp-ins-report.htm Legal expenses insurance report Date: 23 October 2007 This report explores the current state of the legal expenses insurance market and future trends with a view to promoting 'before the event' (BTE) legal expenses insurance so that more people have access to legal advice and assistance. The research for the report was done by Dr Oonagh McDonald, Ian Winters and Mike Harmer, of Fwd thinking communications. Full report (PDF 0.92mb 76 pages) Chapter 1 - 4 (PDF 0.24mb 58 pages) Appendices (PDF 0.69mb 18 pages) Related information Conditional fee agreements Civil procedure rules Civil proceedings costs Claims management regulations

Before the Event (BTE) or After the Event (ATE) legal expenses insurance. http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/newsrelease231007a.htm Research shows low awareness of before the event legal expenses insurance 23 October 2007 Research published today by Ministry of Justice reveals that less than one in four consumers have heard of either Before the Event (BTE) or After the Event (ATE) legal expenses insurance. Legal Expenses Insurance (LEI) provides the policyholder with the cost for legal fees in the event that they become involved in litigation. It is a relatively inexpensive mechanism for resolving a range of problems and legal disputes. The research report produced by FWD reveals that there is a considerable lack of information about the product both in the public domain in general and at the point of sale. Awareness among lower socio-economic groups (C2DE) is particularly low even though this group appears to be more likely to need to use a BTE product. The report also reveals that despite low awareness overall market penetration of the product has increased to 59% of the population (this compares with 50% penetration revealed by Mintel in their report published in December 2006). The research estimates that 28m adults currently own the product, most as an add on to another insurance policy. Welcoming the findings, Justice Minister Bridget Prentice said: The report gives us an insight into the current state of the BTE insurance market. Whilst more and more people now have the product, they don't appear to know how to use it. This is particularly true of the more vulnerable members of society. BTE insurance is important because it provides people with a means of getting advice and assistance when trying to resolve disputes. I would encourage insurance industry bodies and consumer groups to try and deal with this problem Other findings show: Legal Expenses Insurance cover is often fragmented or even duplicated. Due to lack of awareness many consumers are not aware that they have BTE insurance The market is likely to expand over the coming years increasing the number of consumers in this position The report recommends a number of steps that insurance industry bodies and consumer's groups- such as the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and Association of British Insurers (ABI)- should take forward. These include: Agreeing ways of promoting LEI and providing more information about the product both in general terms and at the point of purchase (including communicating its benefits more widely). Developing ways to encourage policy holders to read their policy documents Changing the name of Legal Expenses Insurance to something consumers are more likely to understand. One suggested alternative is 'legal protection' The report also recommends that employers provide LEI to employees Additionally, Housing Associations could provide LEI for tenants Officials at the Ministry of Justice have been discussing these recommendations with the FSA, ABI, Housing Corporation and employers groups to examine how these recommendations could be taken forward. Notes to Editors 1. 'The Market for BTE Legal Expenses Insurance: A research report for the Ministry of Justice', by Oona McDonald, Ian Winters and Mike Harmer 2. Until now the only other independent survey of the Legal Expenses Insurance market was published by Mintel in December 2006. 3. BTE insurance products have been available in the UK since 1974. The research report shows that 93% of all households have home buildings insurance in place; 78% have home contents Insurance; 4. The structure of the BTE market in the UK is complex. It is sold in a variety of ways usually as an add on to motor or household insurance. It is also sometimes sold attached to travel insurance. 5. The vast majority of BTE products are sold through intermediaries consisting of national brokers, broker chains and regional brokers. 6. For more information contact Zoë Campbell, Ministry of Justice Press Office, 020 7210 8695

I wish to bring an action in the High Court against a certain party via the use of a solicitor who will act on a CFA, ideally reinforced by an 'after the event insurance'. Where do I find such a solicitor? It appears that the initial mistake by the Nationwide B. S. in selling me the purported contradictory invalid policies has been compounded by collusion with the Norwich Union Insurance Co. Furthermore, the blatant attempt to damage my credit and the defamation of my character with Paypal and the various Credit Agencies has done me irreparable harm as any chance of gainful employment as a qualified Personal License Holder will have been reduced to zero, so I have wasted the majority of the last two years looking for work in this discipline. The withdrawal of my only two cards; both with Nationwide; has created severe difficulties. I have not received any amendment regarding my life policy, whether the policy is in force or not, certainly the continuing financial demands show no reduction from the original premium, only additives from the debt collection agencies. This continuing saga; though I have attempted to resolve the matter through mediation by a national newspaper; has put my marriage under oppressive strain.