Jump to content

Dodgeball

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    6,399
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Dodgeball last won the day on April 4

Dodgeball had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,220 Excellent

About Dodgeball

  • Rank
    Gold Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

692 profile views
  1. Are you on good terms with the dmp providers,do you pay them too much. Are the accounts which are not being paid to the dmp being persued? I have to say this is a common scenario, so don't worry it will get sorted. I take it tou have no secured loans or council arrears?
  2. How many creditors are we talking about and what kind of credit are they Have any of the others been defaulted yet?
  3. The situation is this. A default notice issued under guidance. Is not the same as a DN under the Consumer credit act, all the former does is warn the debtor that the lender intends to record a default on his file, nothing more. A default notice issued under the CCA section 87, warns the debtor that he is in default of the agreement and gives him opportunity to remedy before further enforcement action is taken, nothing to do with data recording. Now this is where the complications start, because although a section 87 notice has nothing to do with data protections, in fact it does not mention it at all . The very fact that the lender sent it indicates the account is in default, and this must be recorded on your file. So, if a Section 87 is issued it will trigger default on your file. The opposite is not true however, if the lender chooses to record that you have defaulted, he can send you a notice stating that he is going to do just that in 28 days, but only that, this action has no relevance to enforcement.
  4. This is from the updated guidance, see the highlighted provisions It is important that you are made aware when such arrangements are made and maintained, that it will show on your credit file and that whilst arrears may accrue and increase, a default will not be recorded. Following a satisfactory period of payments under a temporary arrangement, and if the lender agrees, the status on your account may be set to zero; although the history will remain. This can be described as capitalisation, re-scheduling or re-aging. Depending on the product this could result in adjustments to how your account is reported on your credit file e.g. the payment amount, repayment period as well as the status. Should you make full payments from this point onwards your account will be classified as being up to date. If after a period of time a permanent change in terms on an account occurs then if appropriate, the revised terms should be recorded at the CRAs and payment performance calculated against the new terms; in such circumstances there will no longer be an arrangement in place. If your lender agrees to give you a temporary arrangement, but you fail to make the agreed payment against the new terms, they may still file a default (see Principle 4 below) as soon as a payment is missed, as long you were at least 3 months in arrears on the original agreement. I am afraid i dont know what you mean about this not being visible, it would seem to me, to defeat its own purpose if it were not visible ?
  5. He cannot issue a DN under 87, but as we all know that is different to putting a D on your file and stuffing your credit for six years, we have had a few on here UB. I refer of course to the credit marker.
  6. There is something to consider on this first. If the default does not appear on your credit file currently, and never has. They can place one when you default now. You need to be cautious, if a default has appeared on this account before and just dropped off, you should be OK As they cannot default the same account twice
  7. regarding the assertion that just letting the loan run its course, permits an action in court without a default notice. Not true. Letting an account run its term is not a default, the action must be brought on breach. 87 Need for default notice. (1)Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a “default notice ”) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,— It is not true that the notice is not needed when there is no option for remedy. (c)if the breach is not capable of remedy, the sum (if any) required to be paid as compensation for the breach, and the date before which it is to be paid.,ie the term has expired. In this case It applies when no remedy by paying arrears is possible. In this case because the agreement expired, it gives the debtor chance to pay before proceedings.
  8. Not sorry really, I am dealing with one exactly the same at the moment. Real default 2013 like yours funnily enough .
  9. With due respect to the OP. I don't think anything on this thread is "clear". My point was that whatever occurred there has been little or no damage to the Hirer/buyer. Apparently, the vehicle still has a sale value commensurate with one of its correct mileage. She is not bound to purchase the vehicle, as far as the law is concerned the car is still on hire at this point, there are remedies available under the Act which enable her to return it wit no further cost if she feels she has been sold a lemon.
  10. I really do not understand what is going on here TBH. The OP buys a car for 18K, five months later, no arrears she finds that it has been clocked, yes I can see how that may irritate. But then she says the car is worth 17k TRADE now, that's even with the millage issue. She needs13k to pay off the HP, she could loan the money, sell the car, pay back the loan with a few days interest, and recover the deposit with 5 months free rental under her belt. the HP company would be the ones out of pocket...
  11. AS said she cannot legally can't sell the car until title is transferred. She cannot say there were current damages, she may be able to complain if and when the car was hers, but until the P is settled it ihs the HP company who need to complain to the dealer. Whilst she has the car, she will be paying contractual payments if she stops the will repossess and chase her for the full amount outstanding. I would get the car back under VT then pursue costs, outside the agreement.
  12. You are not the only one. You say you paid £18 for the car now you say it is worth 17k trade, sounds to me like you got a good deal. So what are your loses? Or is this whole thread just an elaborate shaggy dog story. If this is the case you do not want to terminate at all, why would you? just pay the agreement and bill the dealer for work done, if you feel it unjust.
×
×
  • Create New...