Minmoo I made the expensive mistake (before I discovered CAG) of grabbing a "generous" offer from MBNA to settle 4 accounts I had with them (2 original and 2 which MBNA had bought from A&L) for 35% F&F. This "saved" me £23k of the £34k balance - but in retrospect it actually cost me £11k (borrowed from family) when it could have cost me £0k as I now believe they had no enforceable agreements and thus no means of enforcing the debt. I had already more than repaid the full amounts originally borrowed on the accounts and the full £34k balances were made up of high interest and unfair charges accumulated over more than 8 years - so morally I feel I owed them nothing, but that's water under the bridge. I certainly won't settle any of the remaining debts I still have with other companies until forced to do so. The odd threatening letter or hassle phone call is worth it as I feel I have been rooked by financial institutions for years and a small bit of payback is long overdue. That's a long winded way of saying I agree with DD - you are a LONG way from having to agree or negotiate any F&F's. I would use CPUTR to flush them out. I suspect they'll either walk away when they realsise you know your rights or offer a low F&F PDQ - which you have to decide whether to accept, negotiate down or refuse to pay a bean - depending on how strongly you feel, how much you can afford and how much you value piece of mind. Above all - rememebr YOU are in the driving seat. THEY need to do all the running - at least for now until things are clarified. Good luck - hope this helps! BD

Caro The "hardship" card hasn't worked since well before the SC debacle. FOS upheld a claim by HBOS that waiving "future" unfair charges for 3 months (which I wouldn't incur anyway as I had stopped all Direct Debits and SO mandates - only paying by Debit Card or BACS when cleared funds were available) was enough "evidence" they were treating my hardship "sympathetically". At least it cost HBOS £500 to have FOS support them - but I'm still down £5k in unfair HBOS charges. Seeing RBS pay out nearly £1 billion in bonuses while still losing over £1 billion last year shows just how "fair" our Banks want to play. I share your faith in GLC. Their excellent reputation in Glasgow is well deserved - not only in fighting for the "wee men" against the big banks, but also for getting the law changed regarding unscrupulous property factors and slum landlords in Scotland. Keep the faith. Scottish justice tends to have a lot more common sense than the version South of the Border - 5 years (not 6) for SB debts and the creditor CANNOT enforce debts without the original signed agreement - none of this "balance of probablities" guff that big "reputable" institutions just "wouldn't get things wrong". Losing over £24 billion in one year and nearly £30 billion over three years is surely ample proof that big banks can and DO make big mistakes - and compound them with big bonuses and continued unfair charges. Once all the revolutionaries are finished in North Africa, I think the English should invite them over to sort out the Westminster puppet government! BD

Zingy Good - can you tell us any more?. How near to court date did they settle. Did you get all you wanted from them? Anything else you can tell us that would be helpful/encourtaging to us in CAG? BD

That's exactly what they DO. It used to be they charged £28 per month for an unauthorised overdraft plus £39 a shot for every payment made (or declined) which caused this unauthorised overdraft. Now they charge up to £155 pe rmonth for an unauthorised overdraft of anything over £10 - so the CAN and DO claim you owe them whatever THEY CHOOSE - and it appears we can do nothing about it unless and until we are able to pay off the overdraft.

I agree with DX - but I would send another letter after 6 weeks telling them you'll go to FOS if no satisfactory response by afurther 2 weeks (i.e. 8 weeks after your first letter). BD

Caro Fair point - but even a "I've agreed (or been advised) not to say anything further" would be nice to get - even nicer than getting the star hit as it would be for everyone's benefit. Getting nothing at all suggests a defeat which is demoralising for others. BD

Cupcake I agree that this is not worth jeopardising the (pretty good!) deal for - but given they will probably want to offer ( or you will want to offer them?) a low F&F in a few months' or years' time then (once your finances are better?) then it is worth a small bit of effort to try to get the balancve agreed at the earlier amount. Even at 10 -25% F&F this will save you a few hundred pounds of your own money in future. With this in mind why not send a "nice" letter to Uncle Bryan along lines of: Thank you for your letter of XXX. I am pleased to accept your offer of £5 per month in principle with immediate effect and enclose my first payment in the form of cheque no. xxxxx. I propose to set up a Monthly Standing Order Mandate for £5 per month to be paid into the account in the name of XXXXX at Sharks Unlimited Bank plc, Sort Code: Xx XX Xx, Account No. XXXXXXXX starting on XX March 2011. I say I accept this offer in principle as I would ask that you confirm how you have arrived at the current balance as stated by you. According to earlier correspondence the amount outstanding on XX/xX/xxxx was £xxxxx.xx but you have now stated the balance currently outstanding is for £xxxxxx.xx - i.e. some £xxxx.xx more than I was anticipating. Since it is agreed that I shall not be liable for costs I am somewhat confused as to how the balance has grown in the interim and would be grateful if you would check this out and if you still feel your new higher balance is correct I would appreciate your clarifying the reasons for this increase before it is time for the first payment to be met by monthly standing order with the first payment leaving my account on Xx March 2011 and all future payments to be made on the xxth of the month or, wher ethis is not a bank business day, the earliest subsequent bank business day. Hope this helps? BD

Wilchil Not sure about guidelines about what they can ask for. I think they have to accept the Common Financial Statement format used by National Debtline etc. - but can't quote anything to back this up. Basically if you have things that will back up your case - like Job Centre documents etc. then I don't see any great harm in giving them. If anything will harm your case then I would then fall back to just giving abbreviated I&E and heavily edited bank statements. Hope this helps? BD

Angel Any news? BD

Neeta OK - fair enough. I understand how stressful this can be - believe me! I've always found it worth asking for an F&F figure early on - as that gives you a marker for the MOST you'll likely to pay that OC or DCA - as it's difficult for them to put it up but you can always offer less in future. Another argument for an early F&F is that if they agree on say one third (33.33%) then every two thirds of what you pay monthly is going down the drain. For example if you paid all creditors combined £150 per month on a total £15000 of debt (1% or more is typically what a DCA will try to get initially if interest and charges frozen) and they offered a 33.33% F&F you could settle now for £5000. If you didn't do an F&F now but paid the £150 for ten more months and then did the F&F they would settle for £4500 - but the amount you would have paid would be £6000 - this £4500 plus the £1500 (ten payments of £150) paid over the previous ten months. So early F&F's are always better - unless you get them so worried you'll stop all payments that they reduce the F&F % pretty quickly and pretty far. Hope this makes sense? BD PS - You should edit out the exact figure shown above to just "£7500 approx" - so you can't be identified from the exact balance you're showing.

Neeta That's good news - but probably means the original signed CCA is lost or unenforceable - so there may be an even better deal to be had here - like paying nothing more or negotiating a 10-15% F&F (for peace of mind if they pester you). Have you asked for the CCA at any time, how much is the balance, when did you last pay and how much less have you offered than the previous minimum monthly payments required? I don't want to seem nosey - but this info is important in putting things into context so others can see the full circumstances of the offer. BD

Junior See below regarding S 32 of limitation Act: I would refute their contention that the old charges are time barred - but you will probably only get paid out once you raise a court action. This is Capital One's usual style. But if you wnat to try a letter first then I hope this helps. BD: I note your comments regarding the Limitations Act 1980 and I would like to draw your attention to section 32 of the Act as outlined below: (1) .... where in the case of any action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either- (a) the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or (b) any fact relevant to the plaintiff's right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or © the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake; the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it. .... (2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above, deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach of duty. In the case of Kleinwort Benson -v- Lincoln City Council & Others in the House of Lords on 29 October 1998 their Lordships ruled: · If a party pays another on the basis of settled law and that law is subsequently overturned, the paying party may seek recovery of the sums paid over even though this may be many years after the event. · The party seeking repayment now has six years from the date of any new decision affecting it in which to bring an action for recovery of monies paid out under the old, overruled law. The Court also held that if a payment is made under a mistaken understanding of the law, then the person who has made such payment has six years to recover sums paid as a result of this mistaken understanding dating from the date when such mistake should have become evident. It is my assertion that I could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered this issue before April 2006, this being the date of publication of the Office of Fair Trading referred to by you, and so the period of limitation should not have started to run until that time. I therefore resubmit my claim for the refund of all default charges and accrued contractual interest arising from 200X when you first begun to impose such unfair default charges. As previously stated I believe I am entitled to have such default sums refunded in their entirety right back to the initial default charge in May 2004 as I do not accept the charges imposed reflect the true cost to Capital One Bank (Europe) plc and are unfair and disproportionate.

Cupcake I would make your offer as simple as possible - with the least amount of concessions or rights to the creditor if you default. If you don't need to use a court order type format then don't. I suggest you simply draft a simple proposal along lines of : Baby due in 3 months, self -employed partner for whom I work is injured - no work - no pay - not sure how long for at present. Can afford £5 only if all charges an dinterest now frozen - and I know this amount has been accepted by you from others in financial difficulties - I will be prepared to review if/when circumstances alter (don't say improve - so you can review DOWN too). Include summary I&E if you want - but don't detail all debts and other payments unless you have to do so. Something similar got me the £5 deal from Fred - but only after I hadn't paid them anything at all for a good few months. Post up a draft if you want us to give it the once over. Good luck! BD

Dom I agree with Big Yeti. It's worth doing as he says - including reading the entire thread - it will only take an hour or so and you'll feel much more knowledgible afterwards. As I said above, complain to them formally - even if you are in part time work, you do seem to be in genuine financial difficulty and they are NOT treating you as they should under current guidleines (google "FOS (or OFT?) financial difficulty" for more info on this). Tell them it's a formal complaint and you WILL write to FOS if they don't satisfy you. This will cost them around £500 plus a lot of hassle in writing to FOS to defend the indefensible, so they may just play ball right away - but I doubt it! You will need a parachute account elsewhere to stop them taking any more of YOUR hard earned money - set it up PDQ and get everything transferred over (other than your overdraft!). Good luck! BD

Yes definitely - once you've checked the OFT guideleines and identified any breaches. You want them all to go away and not mess woth you whilst you sit out the remainder of the 5 year SB period. BD

AJS Have a look at the OFT guidelines on debt collection - and send a formal complaint to LTSB if you can find ANY way in which they or their agents have broken these. If you don't like their response then report them to FOS - which will cost them £500 or so! Causing them problems like this may well make them just leave you alone - BTW remember SB comes in 5 years in Scotland - so you may only have only 3 or so to wait now. I have a couple of debts approaching this - not mentioned in my signature as I don't want to alert any OC or DCA - will add them to my signature later this year when they reach the 5 year SB date. Good luck! BD

Pickles DO NOT call them or contact them in any way. They are trying to trace someone - probably not you if you've no debts that are in arrears etc. - so why make their job any easier for them by eliminating your address as one of the possibilities? If they ring you refuse to give them ANY personal details. After all YOUR personal details could be used by a stranger for identity theft - so why would you volunteer them to a stranger ringing you unnanounced? If they do call you - and persist in calling even when told not to do so - then send the "no harassment" template from CAG - otherwise save your time, money and envelopes! BD

Donkey - Exactly what I was thinking! That's me agreeing with YOU now too! Indi - would your ex give you a ws outlining how he was approached by her and what she said? If so, then that coupled with her previous assertion that your ex WAS a witness could be dynamite! I would wait and see if the case gets dropped because she CAN'T produce the £23k and £1214 evidence. You can then decide whether to extract revenge (by reporting all of this to police - including the alleged tampering of the signed credit card statement) or let sleeping dogs lie - but given what you had said earlier about broken windows and car vandalsim I might be tempted to drop it - but only if she drops the case against you. A former Scottish MSP is currently spending 3 years in Barlinnie because he thought he was above the Law, could dishonestly claim £200k in libel damages and get his colleagues to lie for him in court (twice!). He will also probably be bankrupted because of the expensive civil cases he forced his opponents to defend. Courts do not like perjury or attempts to pervert the course of justice. I doubt if her pals would see it all the way through if they were aware of the potential ramifications. BD PS - Indi - Sorry others have sought to blacken the good names of DDand me on here :mad2: - For the avoidance of doubt I would stress I am a happily :-Dmarried man (but then so are many Lib Dem MP's). Is that actually avoidance of doubt?

I am totally innocent and have an alibi too! Whoever was in that hotel room with DD was NOT me!

I googled Catlles and found the meeting on 31 Jan approved a take over by a new Company (Sept 2010) called "Bovess" - sounds a bit of a take on "Bovine" to me? I wonder if there are any directors or major shareholders in common? Anyway it's nice to hear of a DCA in trouble who survived from 1927 up till now. Major creditors appear to be Welcome Finance and Ewbank - so another two losing their shirts here hopefully? BD

I've just learned DD had a hotel room earlier this week - and he didn't let on until now!

DD - Totally agree - much better that all facts are aired here so other side can withdraw earlier and more cheaply IF they see this and hav ethe sense to realise they've no chance! BD PS - We've really got to stop agreeing like this - people will talk!

I totally agree as much as possible should be discussed in open forum - not just because I wasn't included in any pm's - but because I agree both with DD's plea to allow others to benefit from all the info/advice in posts and his warning about the need for open monitoring of non-expert advice. Actually I wish there was more open monitoring of EXPERT advice too! Just think of the word EXPERT and it's two components - EX - a "has been" and SPURT - a drip under pressure! Nevertheless I've been thinking about what has been posted recently on this. Given Indi is no longer denying (at least in the official version?) signing the card statement (with the statement showing sum "owed" already hand written?) then is there any mileage in bringing up (if indeed she COULD DO SO?) the fact her ex was initially mentioned as a witness and no longer is - or if it was signed in the office or her kitchen - and exactly when it WAS signed and in front of whom? The "pro" is that it shows the claimant's memory is faulty - or at least selective - by removing a potentially hostile witness. The "con" is the claimant has been put to strict proof that the amount "signed for" matches the total amounts advanced (no evidence yet supllied despite CPR requests) less payments made. If she can't prove all of this then does it matter who (if anyone) "witnessed" Indi signing this card statement - and when/where? Also even if Indi did sign it with the (wrong) amount showing then at that time, then as a vulnerable heavily indebted employee surely she was entitled to accept her boss had got her sums right and was not just out to screw her? If we stray away from the SIMPLE facts which the claimant has to PROVE then are we not in danger of showing the Judge a very acrimonious situation and he/she may form the opinion that Indi is simply wriggling out of her debts because of the subsequent big fall out? I know I've given more questions than answers but I think there is merit in ensuring that a weasly claimant and/or her lawyer doesn't trap Indi into "losing it" on the day! Hopefully when the claimant fails to provide the evidence called for the whole matter will be dropped! BD

My wife's the same age as me - so I'm working on the basis that by age 130 she may well be prepared to "sub contract" some of her "duties" to a couple of spritely 65 year olds! BD:-) PS - put 10th October 2077 in your diary just in case your wife gives you a late pass that night!

subbing - a great thread and great posts!