Jump to content

Master Chief

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    287
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Master Chief

  1. Hi DS, yep it has been a while. I've been otherwise engaged and things were pretty quiet in terms of DCA bullsh**, hence being awol from the forums. But just like the proverbial bad pennies, they are back! I'm OK, bearing up thanks. As you, Brig and count rightly point out, there is clearly defined guidance on CRA file reporting. But the DCA's will insist on using the CRA's as a debt collection tool rather than for the intended purpose. I have no doubt that the error will be corrected just as soon as I point it out to those concerned. I'm sure that I have all the historical evidence that I need, so I'm not unduly worried, just bloody annoyed that they think they can get away with it! Hope you're well too and all the best. MC
  2. Hi to all, Really need some urgent help calculting the rate of interest applied to CC statements, but haven't a clue where to start! If anyone can help/advise i would be very greatful. Thanks, MC
  3. Hi coledog, Thanks for the reply, yep I did write back saying it was a pile of hogwash, but clearly they need a reminder. You'll have a PM shortly. Cheers, MC
  4. Hi DS, This has happened to me. Egg sold my account to Arrow recently, for which I had been (and still am) paying Moorcroft. Despite never missing a payment, two CRA's are showing a new default with the assignment date as the default. The Egg one had previously fallen off. Naughty! MC
  5. Hi, I don't suppose anyone has an Associates Card agreement/app' form for around August 2001? Would be of great help. Thanks. PS. Martin I tried to PM you, but your box is full.
  6. Hi all, I've not been on the forums in a while as I have been busy with other stuff. However, there have been some developments of late with our illustrious friends at 1st Crud, as follows: All had been pretty quiet until recently when I received from 1st Crud' copies of original creditors statements and a note to contact them, which was ignored. Then an email to contact them, which was treated the same. Now I have received a threatogram from thier in-house legal vultures LCS (R D Marr); in essence 'pay up or we MAY take you to court'! There was a time that something like this would have sent me into a mad panic, but things are different now and I'm inclined just to do the same with this worthless piece of junk and file it under 'IGNORE'. Or not? Current situation is that they have sent what they claim is a recon, but contains no variations, signature etc. and my understanding is that this is not sufficient for a court to make a judgement. Also, is it not the case that if there are variations to the original agreement then the 'original' or an actual copy of the 'original' CCA be provided and nothing else would saisfy the CCA request? sorry, I'm a bit rusty having been out of the loop for some time and need a refresher. Anyway, should I be concerned or is this the usual bluster? And I know I've seen plenty of posts about LCS, second desk to the right of the phone monkees (who no longer bother me), are they actual bona-fide solicitors? I thought I read previous posts that stated they are not proper solicitors and not registered with the SRA, they do list a registration number on the letter '3752940'?????? Anyway, your advice welcomed as usual. Regards, MC
  7. Thanks Shadow. An original by defintion is clearly neither a copy (true or otherwise) or a reconstruction, but no doubt that there are plenty of overpaid legal vultures who would convince a judge otherwise. I do wonder if either of the aforementioned would be satisfied with paying original price for a true copy of a Van Gough or Rembrandt! For the sake of keeping gettingsorted's thread clean I'll continue over on mine. Thanks again, MC
  8. Sorry to hijack your thread gettingsorted, but I would just like to ask the_shadow to clarify something in this post for me as I've been out of the loop for a bit and much of all the info I gleaned from endless days swatting up seems to have dissappeared into the ether. Shadow, could I ask you to clarify 'original'? Do you mean that, if the terms had been varied, then they must supply an actual copy of the original signed executed agreement along with the recon? In my thread here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?284421-1st-Crud-CCA-SAR-Failure-(also-Citi-too)-Help-Please/page4 I have just received a recon from 1st Crud, there are two agreements; both recon's. I'm assuing that there are two because of variations. Does this mean that as per Carey, the S78 request is still unfulfilled, i.e. still in dispute, because the original signed executed agreement is not included. Mine too is S.127 (3). Thanks MC
  9. Hi gettingsorted and welcome. nicklea: Could you explain a little what an S10 is and what is its benefit? Thanks. Coledog: I guess your suggested approach is two-fold. Encourage them to just go away and start the stat-barred clock, would I be right? Thanks again, MC
  10. Hi Coledog & nicklea, thanks for the quick replies. Nice to hear from you peeps again. Any views on the actual documents themselves, are they kosher? Cheers, MC.
  11. Hi all, It's all been quiet on the Western front since Xmas and for other reasons I'd put various bits on the backburner. However, on Easter Saturday I received a lovely gift from our illustrious friends at 1st Crud in the form of an "alleged" True Copy of my CCA, reconstituted , not a signed executed agreement. They are requesting that I respond with a payment offer within 14 days! I wonder if any of you kind, knowledgeable people could give the documents the once over and let me know what you think. I haven't been on the forums in a while and am a little out of touch as to what the situation is regarding court proceedings being issued on the back of reconstituted agreements. My last understanding was that as this agreement was allegedly taken out in 2001, the protection of CCA 1974 s.127(3) applies, i.e in order for 1st crud to persue this in the courts they would require the original signed executed agreement; is this still the case? What is my next move? Mnay thanks to all in advance. MC. CCA TC 2.pdf CCA TC 1.pdf CCA TC Cover Letter.pdf
  12. Thank you, I do love you people; you are all so very awesome
  13. Thank you cerberusalert, much obliged. I will be penning a suitable email today. MC
  14. Thanks all for your advice, which pretty much confirmed what I was thinking. A strongly worded letter of complaint will be winging its way tomorrow. I am beside myself with anger at how they have tried it on with the clear knowledge that they are doing so; complaints will be going to relevant bodies. Just to clarify one further thing, I'm assuming that the same applies to the overdraft i.e. low priority debt? Thanks, MC
  15. OK, that seemed to work above, but I thought it hadn't!
  16. Thanks Dadofholly & CitezenB. If it helps, here are the latest communications from them as pdf's. Having trouble attaching again, lol. Will try in seperate posts.
  17. ^BUMP^ Sorry, but I'm stressing about this and could do with some advice. Thanks.
  18. Thanks Alf & HS, This one is on hold at the moment, because we have a more urgent issue as regards the Halifax, which I'm looking for some advice on. My Son had a number of accounts, all with Halifax, most with a positive balance amounting to around £900.00. There is a current account with an overdraft of around £108.00 and a credit card with a negative balance of about £140.00 Firstly, with the credit card, I understood (perhaps wrongly) from looking on the .gov.uk site that funeral expenses were the priority debt and once paid any remaining balnce would be spilt between creditors. However, Halifax have sent us a letter saying that they will not release his money until we give them written permission to pay the outstanding balance of his credit card. They state that there is 'a legal requirement for outstanding debts to be settled before any monies are paid to family and friends', which I find contrary to what I read about the priority being funeral expenses! The other issue is with charges against his overdrawn current account. Myself and my son's mum went into his branch between Xmas and the new year (29th or 30th) to advise them of his passing. We were advised at that time that any charges subsequent to his death would be waived or credited back. Due to a long delay with the coroner, we were unable to furnish them with a certificate until 30/01/2011 (he passed on 23/12/2010). However, we have continued to receive letters regarding his O/D account and stating £5.00 per day charges, now I have spoken to the branch manager about this as well and yet still they are sending letters demanding payment and stating daily charges! Please tell me we can sue the feckers for some sort of damages, they have been complete and utter shysters, ignored our requests to stop sending demands and gone back on what they told us verbally in branch! Reading between the lines, it seems they are using the O/D and charges as leverage for the CC to be paid, but maybe they want all thet paid too! Your advice greatfully received. MC
  19. Hi and sorry for posting in the wrong forum, but wasn't sure where to stick this one. If a kind mod would like to move it somewhere more appropriate, please do. As some of you may know, my son unexpectedly passed away in December. His mum and I are currently trying to sort his estate etc and one thing that has cropped up is in regard to a distance learning course he had taken up with the Home Learning College. The situation is that he took out a loan, arranged by the HLC via what is now Barclays Partenr Finance. Now there is going to be nowhere near enough in his estate to repay them, there is not enough to pay even half of his funeral expenses. But it dawned on me that the HLC had been paid in full, in advance for this course, which would have included on-going tutor supoport and the costs of the final exams he would have taken. It struck me that there may be a possibility of a partial refund, at least for the costs of the exams that he would not now be taking. So I emailed them and advised them of the situation, that he had passed away and would they be offering a partial refund. thier response was a blunt 'you should speak with the finance company'. Which struck me as strange, because, as I see it, they have been paid in full, in advance. So they, in my mind, should be the ones to approach as regards a possible part refund. I replied, but this time a little stonger, saying that they were passing the buck and we could always ask a small claims judge to decide. Again they responded with speak to the finance company! Now I'm not sure whether it would be seen as acceptable to expect a partial refund, although it would seem fair to me, on the basis that they have been pre-paid for services and expenses that they now would not have to provide! Could I get some views pleaese on whether my view would seem reasonable and who should be the company to approach? Much obliged in advance. MC
  20. Just an update on things, as regards the CRA info. I have been playing letter ping pong with the DCA (1St Crud) for some time and making official complaints about everything that I have identified. Toward the end of last year I put in an official complaint to Equifax in relation to the incorrect and outdated information (via its online query) and I had a response from 1st Crud via Equifax saying that although there was no proof that the 'Settled' marker (re Experian Nov' 06 report) was not the same account, the information should not be shown due to it being over 6 years since the original default! The upshot is that, on the 25/1/2011, the information was removed from Equifax! Great news I know, but why so easy? As far as I can see from other peopels experience, trying to get information removed from your credit file is similar to attempting dentistry on a fully lucid and unrestrained crocodile! This makes me think, together with the denial that it is the same account, me thinks that some cages have been rattled! As a side not, proving that they are the same account would be easier than proving otherwise. Anyway, it would seem that a minor battle has been won. Now to consider if I should take further action.
  21. Hi All, Thanks again for all of the great info, it is a relief to know that the funeral expenses are the priority, because both his mother and I are far from wealthy people and this is an expense that we had just not budgeted for. His mum would like to keep the TV, really because it was something that he was so pleased to get. But I guess if the insurance doesn't cover death, then it will have to go back. Anyway, thank you everyone for your kind words and support, you are all fantastic and a big part of my support network. Thank you. MC
  22. Thanks to all for your thoughts and great advice. Sorry I have taken a while getting back, just juggling a billion things at the moment and time is short. I really appreciate all of your help, thank you. MC
×
×
  • Create New...