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. Thanks SS, He doesn't show on the register at all; is that a good or bad thing? I'll check as regards how his tax matters were dealt with. EDIT: His personal tax affairs were dealt with via PAYE. He had a visit from the tax man before he moved and around £4k was demanded in employers liability tax (he thinks). Which was duly paid. However, my brother says that the same man came back some time after, although he wasn't there at the time (I guess his landlay told him). But this would have been before the company was dissolved. I think his main concern seems to be corporation tax? Thanks & sorry for keeping you awake MC
  2. Any point in doing a Registry Trust search on the company? Or because it is dissolved there is no point? MC
  3. Compulsory Strike Off. Or DEF6. I ordered the last three docs, didn't really say a great deal. But looks like the first compulsory strike off was suspended then the second and then aftrer 3 months it was desolved. Not really sure what all that means though!
  4. Posts Crossed - in response to postggj Absolutely, exactly what I what I was trying to tell him. Just hope I can convince him! Thanks postggj & SS, you could just be the fourth emergency service lol
  5. So unlikely he will have any criminal charges brought?
  6. Thank you so much or your advice, this could make all the difference to him and the rest of the family can relax a little. TBH, we were all getting very worried for him!
  7. Hi SS, really appreciate your time to reply, thank you. Company is marked as dissolved struck off June 2010. I believe the company debts were much greater. He did say that one company issued proceedings, but as neither party turned up it was thrown out. ty MC
  8. Struck off & dissolved June 2010. No, original loan that was secured was settled way before things went wrong. Any point in ordering any of the companies house docs?
  9. Thanks postggj. His personal debts are not such an issue I think, all agreements would have been signed a decade ago or more. Can I do a credit check on him or would that not be a good idea?
  10. Ok, that's interesting. He hasn't checked anything, he is monarch amongst Ostriches! I'm trying to get him to resolve all this, but I think until he is sure of no major reprisals he will continue to remain a ghost. I want him to check his file, CCj's etc, but he does not want to give his location away. I'm prepared to act as his agent, although not sure how I can without giving an address. Obviously I'm not keen on having to deal with the likes of DCA's etc phoning here, but will if need be. Funnily enough they no longer scare me since joining CAG. How can we proceed to get his credit file etc. without divulging his location, or at least initially? EDIT: I believe he used the proceeds of the van personally!
  11. Thanks postggj, really glad you picked up on this as I have a lot of respect for your posts on here. He left the company in the hands of his accountant to wind up, but seems to think that she didn't deal with it, because she thought she wouldn't be paid. He is not sure who has been after him or anything really because he moved several hundred miles away and has had no contact with anyone since. Good news about the loan, but what about the van? Thanks , MC
  12. Ok, I'll try to keep this as succint as I can. My brother is in a bit of a pickle, well quite a big pickle in fact. A couple of years ago, my brother had a sucessful business (ltd Company) and his marriage broke down after she did the dirty on him for the second or third time. As is frequently the case, he fell quite badly ill with depression and his business went to the wall. With no income to speak of, unfortunately he dibbed into the company coffers and took (he thinks) around 3-4 grand out in addition to selling the company van and pocketing the proceeds, which amounted to about another £3k. He realises that it was wrong, but he was (still is) in quite a bad state and was just trying to survive. Subsequently, he did a runner and for the past couple of years has been flying under the radar. He is still very depressed and homeless (living in a small caravan). At the moment he just can't face the consequences of what he has done or the £30k (est) of personal debt. I understand where he is coming from, having been in a very similar situation myself. Problem is, his life is not going to improve much until he resurfaces and faces up to these things he tried to leave behind. I'm attempting to help him and have given him some reassurance as regards his personal debt, but I'm not sure where he stands in realtion to the company debt and misappropriation! The last thing I want to do is convince him to exit stealth mode and be banged up, that really would not help him at all. Is anyone able to offer some advice as to what might happen to him? Thank you.
  13. thanks nicklea. As a layman, I assumed that the date of the letter indicated the 'sale' date, but obviously not. Shame. But the balance 1st Crud are claiming is still wrong and of course the 'settled' marker is still unexplained, so I'm not giving up quite yet. MC
  14. ty nicklea. Citi letter states that "This letter is to inform you that, with effect from the date at the top of this letter" 05/06/2003 "under a written assignement, we have assigned your contract......." 1st Crud state, in letter dated 23/05/2003 "Associates has assigend to 1st crudite Ltd the full outstanding balance due under the agreement referred to above. As a result of this agreement, the full amount outstanding is due to 1st Crud IMMEDIATELY" " We will therefore be continuously phoning you at the most rediculous times night and day and demanding money with menaces in addition to clogging up your letterbox with unlawful and unsubstantiated legal threats in direct contravention of OFT guidlines and buggering up your credit file indefinately, becuase we can get away with it" Ok I made the last bit up, but that's what they should have said! The settled marker fell off the file some time back, the print I have is Nov 2006, just thought it was very odd that they should do that and wondered why, then wondered a bit more etc. MC
  15. I suppose what I'm trying to get at eventually is, if the account is marked as settled 05/08/2002 by the OC then why have they continued to charge late fees, overlimit charges and interest up until March 2003. Oh, and now I have another completely different sale/assignment date, which I didn't pick up on before. In Citi's SAR response they now say it was sold to 1st Crud March 03. They just contradict each other all the time and it implies to me that they have been less than honest about something and I would like to know what that is.
  16. They both say different dates - as of the date of this letter, which are both different!
  17. Hi CCM and thank you. I have CCA'd the DCA, but not the OC yet. Have SAR'd both, results so far uninspiring to say the least. The CCA went into dispute 18/11, but for other reasons I have given them some extra time to produce before I send the official account in dispute letter. With the SAR's I have written back asking for them to comply fully. Have been looking at the massive thread re: the CPR 31.16, so maybe that would be worth a try if they continue to be awkward with the SAR's.
  18. Hi good people, I realise that this is not a priority question as there is no legal action being taken at present, but I wonder if I could probe the grey matter of you banana types. For background information I have a thread going here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?284421-1st-Crud-CCA-SAR-Failure-(also-Citi-too)-Help-Please&p=3208917#post3208917 But in essence I am trying to establish the validity of the absolute assignment of an alleged defaulted Associates Credit Card account. I have an NoA (letter of introduction) from 1st Crud, assignment as of 23/05/2003 The NoA from the OC (Citi) dated as of 05/06/2003 1st Crud are stating that they own the account before Citi say they have sold it! A further complication is that for this account I have a printout of my Experian credit file of Nov' 2006, which clearly shows that Citi (the OC) marked the account as 'SETTLED' 05/08/2002! I can't think of any reason (and no one else can suggest one) as to why the the OC would mark it as settled other than; the account was paid up (which it wasn't) or it was sold. Have I reasonable grounds to think that the sale took place much earlier than the NoA's suggest? And based on what I have said, dates of NoA's not agreeing and the earlier settled marker; are there grounds to think that the assignment is not valid and that 1st Crud don't have a legal right to enforce/collect? I've never received a DN or TN from Citi/Associates either. thanks in advance MC
  19. Quick question please good people of CAG. If there is doubt as to when the actual sale took place and furthermore that 1st Crud & Citi both have different dates for the NoA's, does this bring into doubt the legality of the assigment? i.e. the sale was not properly/legally concluded therefore it is null & void and 1st Crud do not have a legal right to perform collection activities? Meaning they have to return the account to Citi and , possibly repay any monies collected + interest of course! Sorry, just the grey matter working overtime!
  20. That is tragic, so awful! Companies that think they can operate outside of the law with impunity should have their licence revoked immediately, restrictions amount to a slap on the wrist, but the damage to innocent human beings has already been done. Where is the justice? I fully intend to take whatever information I have and use it in the most effective way that I can. However, I have to be sure of my information first and that is why I have been asking stupid questions like: What other explanation could there be for the 'Settled' marker if not to indicate it was sold at that point? MC
  21. Merely stating my interest in your thread and that I have subscribed to it. That way i get notifications when something new is posted
  22. Now I believe that it is correct to say that following a sale of a debt, no interest or charges can be applied until the debtor has been notified of the assignmet. i.e if a sale took place on a Monday and the debtor was informed (via NoA's) on the following Monday that no interest or charges could be applied during this period. I'm not certain about charges, but interest would definately be a no no! In any case, if my debt was indeed sold 05/08/2002 as the CRA file suggests, why have Citi continued to charge me overlimit charges, late fees and interest up until the NoA?
×
×
  • Create New...