Worked it out using the spreadsheet thing on CAG and had a friend check my calculations (I'm not great with figures). If they offer anything less than I've calculated, I'll contest it. If they offer more, then I'll accept.

Again, many thanks for your help

H. x

Already had an admission from them that PPI was charged to the loan. That was through a speculative thing through "The Claims Guys." Thought I'd get someone else to do the footwork before claiming in person - no point in giving them 36% of any claim.

I'll be using the letter that I put together using CAG advice which got me a refund of £4,700 from RBS a couple of years ago...

Thanks again.

H. x

Thanks for your usual succinct reponse DX. Much appreciated. In that case, nothing to lose with a PPI claim, so off to the post office with a letter this afternoon!

You're a great help as always. Thanks

Hi, just a quickie...

Is a PPI claim construed as an admission of liability on an account?

Less than the 6 years for Statute Barred, so would that set a company back chasing? They don't have the original "wet" agreement and so can't (at the moment) take this to court as it was before April 2007.

Any advice gratefully received.

Thanks

H. x

Many thanks DX. I suspected that may be the case. I'll have to check with her to see if it was sold on, though I doubt it.

We'll see. I'll report back!

Hi All,

Hope you're well and a very Happy New Year!

A while ago, I helped a friend with her Santander (old Alliance & Leicester) loan from 1999.

She was (and still is) unable to work, through illness.

We sent a SAR to Santander,

who admitted in writing that they don't have the original loan agreement

- as it was before April 2007,

then they need it for recovery/court action.

The only correspondence from Santander since then has been a yearly statement of account.

That was three years ago.

She could really do with some funds at the moment to help with her disability issues and some equipment to help her with day-to-day life...

My question is,

would a PPI claim on the original Alliance and Leicester loan re-set the statute barred clock and/or open a whole new can of worms?

I realise that they may say they will off-set the PPI refund against the amount still outstanding on the loan.

Many thanks for any advice.

Cheers,

H. x

Thanks Dx. In that case, SAR to see all the info they already have (however, they're obliged to state if they hold original signed agreement) and when we've had a good look, then a CCA.

Many thanks for your continued help.

H. x

Thanks guys. SAR already sent and she received an acknowledgement.

My thought was that we should wait and see what comes back on the SAR

- if they can't or won't confirm that they hold the original (not a copy or reconstruction) of the agreement, then that's it, Idem can do one.

However, so that my friend can rest easier,

I'm looking at offering maybe 5% of the whole debt as F&F with a guarantee that there will be no onward sale to any other company.

We'll see.

Your thoughts so far are very much appreciated.

Thanks.

H. x

Hello all, hope everyone is well!

I've been helping a friend with her concerns over an unsecured Lombard Direct loan taken out well before April 2007.

She thinks it was 1999.

She's been paying token amounts for quite a while now after the debt was passed on to Arden Credit Management

- she's the sort that would like to pay but can't (pride, honesty, etc).

Arden offered her a settlement (F&F) for exactly 10% of the amount owing, which, being unemployed, she still couldn't afford.

The debt has now been returned to Idem who have instructed "Fidelite" to act on their behalf.

Now, as the F&F offer from Arden was so comparatively low,

I thought that there may well be something wrong with the original agreement.

Instead of just a CCA, I paid for the £10 postal order for her to send a SAR,

which has now been acknowledged (receipt) but she only sent it last week.

Obviously, Idem have the statutory 40 days to adequately and satisfactorily respond.

We've sent the standard no phone calls and no doorstep visits letters as well,

but she received a letter from Fidelite this morning, threatening doorstepping.

Not a problem, I'll make sure she sends a copy of the letter to them as well.

The bottom line is that my friend is now disabled and has no real prospect of repaying the loan.

I fear for her health if she is hounded by Idem or any DCA they may nominate to "handle" the debt.

My main worry for her is that she'll get asked to make repayments that she can't afford (she now works part-time)

and I'd say that her ever being able to pay the full amount is a non-starter.

So... any advice on her best way to offer a F&F offer to Idem please?

Obviously, she'll have to wait until the SAR response is received,

but I'd like to be able to reassure her with some kind of plan of action.

Many thanks.

H. x

Have Lowell bought the account from Cooperative? They have been offloading quite a few lemons onto the more, shall we say, "gullible" DCAs recently due to the bank's own troubles.

If your main concern is inability to pay due to hardship, chances are you've probably already paid back more than the amount Lowell bought the debt for.

You say this will become statute barred in 30 days. Are you sure about this? No payments or written acknowledgement of the alleged debt in the last 6 years (5 in Scotland)?

If so, you could either ignore them for a month or send them a SAR (which doesn't reset the SB clock) and they have 40 days to respond. Although a SAR would cost you a £10 fee, you'd have written evidence of statute barred status or not.

Also, old Co-Op credit cards were often sent out with mis-sold PPI so after SB date, you may be able to enquire about refunds - you should see any added PPI listed in the SAR.

Hope that helps.

H. x

This is the letter I send for people if they're on benefits. If you think it's relevant to your case, just adjust the text accordingly. You can leave out the I&E paragraph if you wish, though only a judge can order that one is filled in.

Dear Sir/Madam,

Account Ref: 1234567890

With regards to my current “repayment agreement” with you, I am in a position to be able to offer you no more than £1 per calendar month.

I own no property, have no savings or appreciable assets and rely on [Job Seekers’ Allowance] as my sole source of income.

I quote the Department of Work & Pensions, who state:

“You will be paid the sum of £72 per week, which is the legal minimum on which the Government believes you need to live on.”

During telephone calls, your staff have erroneously asserted that I am obliged to provide you with a personal statement of income/expenditure in order to put a repayment plan into place.

I have been advised that this 'personal' information is just that - personal.

However, following the insistence of your staff and their claims that an income/expenditure statement is a requirement regarding this matter, I have obtained a Court orientated Income and Expenditure Form, to which, only a Court and/or Judge can legally have access, and filled in the details required therein.

Following the revelations about my financial status that completing this form brought to light, I would like to thank you and your staff for pointing me in the right direction regarding my rights.

From this information, it is obvious that I currently have no disposable income whatsoever.

It has been suggested that, following discovery of this situation, a County Court Judge would, in all probability, order that I can afford no more that £1 per month to each and all creditors, which of course includes you.

Therefore, I would formally request that you freeze any interest and late payment charges as they would not be productive in this case.

Also, could you please supply me with the relevant information/documents necessary for me to set up a standing order to continue paying instalments towards the amount owing on the above account at a token rate of £1 per calendar month.

Please note that I have no intention of avoiding any legally and fairly claimed payments on the above account, but I firmly believe that my offer of repayment is appropriate, considering my current circumstances. Should these circumstances change, I will, of course, notify you as soon as possible to arrange repayment at a higher monthly amount.

Yours faithfully,

PRINT NAME DON’T SIGN

Hope that helps. H. x

That's fair enough Davyly.

I would say that regarding the original query, the OP is quite ok to write (not phone) the OC and make it very plain what he feels the siatuation is.

There's no harm in being firm, and certainly no harm in making a threat of small claims action - especially as this is a case of mistaken identity and as a result, harassment and trashing of what (it would seem) had been a perfectly good credit reference file.

Just need to stick to facts and be prepared to follow through with any 'threats' made. If done correctly, the DCAs (in my experience) really do back down.

As in many cases, with "phishing trips" they need to be told exactly where you/they stand. As previously stated, the onus is on them to prove any indebtedness beyond any doubt.

Anyway, best of luck from me too Stockport, and if you do need any further help, please do ask.

H. x

Guys, Brigadier has been immensely helpful to many people on here, me included. It's thanks to his (and others) advice that I've won quite a few cases, had claims dropped and compensation payments made.

It's hot, Brig (and I) are getting on a bit, cut us some slack, eh lads?

Can't remember where I found the figure, but it was a CAG link to the judgement in full and an article in one of the industry online magazines.

It worked, anyway, but yes, I take your point about being solid on the facts...

Exactly...

Costs dear Halibut, they know the judge would never award costs for postage.

My point was more my usual "rubbishing their claims" - if it's such an urgent matter, why send second class if they want a fast response?

Makes a mockery of the whole "Immediatley" and "as soon as possible" guff that they come up with. Empty words, meaningless threats. And proveable in court

Basically used a vague legal precedent, small claims rather than High Court and stated I WOULD go through with it. They dropped it like a hot potato as it would have meant compensation and both my and their court costs. Oh, and my harassment claim was for the nominal sum of a penny - everything else mounted up to over £200 in proveable costs (including my time taken to correspond at a fixed rate)

Simply wrote, stating I'd persue non-payment through small claims court with specific reference to harassment.

"Also, as a result of your company’s continued unsubstantioated/proven link with me, I refer you to my letter of xx/xx/xx, in which I had no alternative but to formally request that your company ceased any and all contact with me and my family forthwith, due to the frequency of communications, both by telephone and in writing - dates and times of which have been noted and a full and complete record retained. With reference to this, I feel I must also draw your attention to the recent case of MBNA v Harrison and the subsequent judgement by High Court Judge Nicholas Chambers QC, as certainly, the aforementioned calls by your company, over a number of weeks, were the cause of considerable and relentless personal distress, both to me and my family.

I quote directly from the aforementioned judgement by Judge Chambers:

“(These) calls were a form of torture, oppressively frequent in amount and often without attribution to an identifiable number.”

Went on to point out that the fine imposed in the above case was set at £50k. That stopped any harassment in its tracks.

I think that if you state your objection clearly, show you know what THEY should or shouldn't be doing, then you can rattle them a bit. Obviously, if in Stockport's case, it went to court, he could easily prove that none of these debts could be linked to him/the DCA couldn't prove they were. In other words, a DCA is highly unlikely to wish to consider court action when they'd be on a hiding to nothing.

Regarding DCAs stating, "You should reply immediately" - my response to that is usually:

"I note the content of your letter, dated xx/xx/xx, in which you assert that I “must” contact your company “immediately,” and “as soon as possible.”

Therefore, I find it quite surprising that your company sent such an apparently urgent letter by Second Class Post."

They never seem to have an answer for that one.

I agree with Brigadier on this one. You CAN claim damages, but I would go about it in a slightly different way.

The reason for claiming damages is what matters and is directly relevant to this case.

Personally, I would claim for harassment, time taken to deal with correspondence at a set rate, costs for posting, photocopying, etc.

It's worked for me in the past and I immediately (by return post) received a compensatory cheque on the understanding that I would not persue that one instance further.

I'd laid out my claim clearly, and said:

"I hereby give you notice that, should you continue to write, erroneously asserting that I am liable for a debt that is not mine as I have never had dealings with the original creditor that you claim, I will have no alternative but to invoice your company for compensation for undue distress caused due to formulating and sending replies to such letters, plus necessary personal expenses incurred.

Please accept this letter as full and adequate advance warning of my intended charges. Future invoices to your company (per letter) will be broken down as follows: (give breakdown)

Oh, and I told them that late payment of invoices would incur a standard £12 late payment fee plus interest at 26%

Certainly thraten them over breach of the DPA too - reporting to all regualtory bodies - and carry out the threat.

Hope that helps.

H. x

If the debt was incurred BEFORE April 2007, then whoever bought it would need to be able to produce the original agreement if they wanted to pursue it through court. That means that they can't produce a photocopy, scan, microfiche, etc. in its place.

If the debt started after the beginning of April 2007, then they are allowed to produce a "reconstituted" agreement - in other words, an accurate representation of the agreement that you would have signed at the time, along with the relevant terms and conditions, plus any subsequent variations in the terms.

As DX says, if you have it in writing from them that the can't produce the agreement, then technically, they can't force you to pay a penny. They're simply relying on you not knowing in order to milk you for more money.

Thanks. That'll really put her mind at rest

Thanks DX.

I'm sure it won't be SB'd as when she was in work, she was paying around £200 a month (she says) in repayments, then £40 a month when she became ill and unemployed, then £1 a month after I became involved, so no clear 6 year period of non payment/acknowledgement.

So... If we write to IDEM saying that they've defaulted on the CCA request and she will no longer be paying, I presume we can send a SAR, I can read through all the details with her and then set about reclaiming PPI.

Something else I was wondering - surely it's in her interest if the debt is unenforceable and not showing on her CRA file, then having Arden update it with "Partially Satisfied" would be detrimental?

She'd be better off stopping payment on an unenforceable account and after 6 years, it's SB...

Your help and advice is always appreciated mate

Hi All,

I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this, but it's always good to have a second or third opinion from my friends here.

As some of you know, after sorting out my own finances, I've been helping a friend to do the same with hers.

We sent a CCA request to Idem (who are the parent company of Arden Credit Management) at the beginning of last week. This morning, she received a letter stating that the amount owing on her alleged account is £5,980 but they are willing to accept a full and final settlement of £585 and upon receipt of payment, consider the account closed and mark her credit file as "partially settled."

As far as I can determine, this account must have been started before the year 2000 . NOTHING appears on her credit reference file at all. She hasn't kept many letters and can't tell me who the original loan was with, though I suspect from some of the reference numbers on the letters it may be an old Lombard Direct loan.

I'm presuming that much of the amount they're claiming she owes is made up of PPI, charges, added interest, etc. and also that they are well aware that they can't provide an enforceable agreement.

At the moment, my friend is quite vulnerable (health problems) and is unemloyed, so she obviously can't afford even the £585 for a settlement - she's currently paying Arden at a rate of £1 a month by standing order.

Now, advice please...

Should she simply ignore the letter and wait for the CCA request response?

Should she reply saying she can't afford a F&F settlement amount?

At some point she'll need to send a SAR, but I would have thought that even if charges and interest were knocked off the total, any PPI repayment would be used to reduce the remaining balance.

Any advice on the way forward would be much appreciated.

Thanks guys.

H. x

No problem Emma. Let us know how you get on

H. x