chiefmegawatty
-
Posts
400 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by chiefmegawatty
-
Nope, the water account was in my wife's name only and she let it run into arrears without my knowledge. Being unable to recover the debt from my wife, the water company put the account in my name and took me to court. During this period my wife had a full time job and I was unemployed and receiving no benefit due to my wife working full time. I have been advised elsewhere on this forum that utility debts can be placed in a person's name other than the account holder. Being unemployed with no benefits the water company then placed a charge order on my house. Why they didn't take my wife to court and issue an attachment to her earnings I will never know. I asked the water company that question and they replied saying that they were not willing to discuss this with me.
-
Found this today: http://www.experian.co.uk/experianhome2/?sc=701676&bcd=Top10creditmythsxxxx Myth 6 states: Friends and family living in your home affect your credit rating Unless you share a financial connection with any of them — for example, a joint mortgage — friends and family have no direct impact on your credit rating. Just living with someone doesn't create a financial connection. I have proof from action taken against me by my water supplier that the above is total tosh. Utility debts can be placed in the name of anyone living in the property despite their name not being registered as the utility account holder. I therefore wonder how much other advice from Experian is total tosh.
-
I have sent a formal letter of complaint to Capquest. Interesting to see how they respond.
-
Hi Brig, I am composing a letter of formal complaint. I also noticed on the FCA website that Capquest have been brought to their attention in the past.
-
Well I have been through this whole process before with CCS Collect regarding the same debt. When it got to this stage they simply sold the debt back to Capquest. No doubt Capquest will sell the debt on again so the cycle of madness will continue for ever. I am of the impression that I should have ignorred all the DCA threatening letters. Should they take me to court I will turn up and defend myself with a perfecty documented defence. How strange that they never took me to court in the six years before the debt became statute barred. Since the debt became statute barred they have been sending me loads of threatening letters. I am of the impression that DCA employees have either an IQ of zero or are simply brain dead.
-
I wrote to Capquest yesterday outlining all these issues and a few others. I mentioned in my letter that Capquest had placed a default on my CRA report in 2012 which showed a default date of 23/05/2007 and on 23/05/2013 it was removed. I therefore asked them how the hell they consider the debt to not be statute barred.
-
Hi Brig, Yes I have been wondering about this along similar lines to you. Capquest said in their letter that the attached statement shows payments I had made not to NatWest but to Capquest !! On closer inspection of the statement it matches an extract of the statement Natwest printed out for me a few months ago when I visited my local branch. However, Capquest's version shows different dates of money transfers into the account. Capquest have obviously taken an extract from my NatWest bank statement from years ago, changed the dates of the transactions to make out the debt isn't statute barred then claim that I had been paying them. You are right, this is serious. Knowing for certain that I have made no payments to NatWest or Capquest perhaps I should report Capquest to Action Fraud.
-
Hi Brig, I think the FCA were referring to legal action in a County Court and not a criminal magistrates court regarding compensation. This whole issue is really a civil case and should never come to criminal court. I feel confident that if this ever went to County court, Capquest would simply claim that it was an admin error to prevent any further action against them.
-
Hi Brig, I am certain that the payments and dates were invented, so yes it is serious. The FCA told me that should any legal action come about, I will end up being compensated with an amount equal to or more than the alleged debt.
-
I am astonished with these DCA's. They will go to the end of the earth to recover trivial debts even when they know the debts are statute barred. Producing false financial statements detailing fake payments must surely amount to attempted fraud. I think the Government should look into the way DCA's are conducting their business and tighten-up the law. I understand that in Scotland, statute barred means the debt doesn't exist and is completely deleted. Why isn't English law the same I ask myself.
-
I haven't done any Subject Access Requests at any time, but I understand what you are suggesting.
-
OK thanks Brig. I spent about 30mins today on the phone to the FCA. They gave me advice very similar to your kind advice so I wrote a letter to Capquest along similar lines to your suggestion. The FCA said if Capquest continue to chase the debt then report them to the financial ombudsman.
-
This morning I received another letter from Capquest stating that I still owe them the full amount. They have attached a financial statement detailing payments I have made to Capquest. The statement shows that I paid them £10 on 28/03/13 and another payment of £10 on 20/1/14. I have never paid anything to Capquest, Natwest, CCS Collect or any other DCA involved in this seven year farce. Luckily I have all my bank statements for the last 3 years which prove that Capquest are telling porkies. I wonder why Capquest think they can convince me that I made payments when I kinow full well I haven't. They must think I'm brain dead.
-
Thanks DX for your reply. I assume the DCA's will leave me alone if I complain and get away with their long term harassment. I would rather them take me to court and loose the case so I can claim for compensation. Should they take me to court I would also point out that Natwest were out of order in the first place. The original direct debit that bounced was placed without my knowledge or permission even though the account was in my name only. I informed the Natwest bank manager of this and he looked at me in a sheepish worried manner. Therefore I want Capquest to take me to court so I can call Natwest into the case to explain why they allow direct debits to be set up by another party without the account holders knowledge. I think I would come out of such a case with loads of compensation and a fraud case against the party who arranged the direct debit without my knowledge.
-
CCS Collect tried to say that it wasn't statute barred claiming that I had made a payment in 2009. I knew that wasn't true so I visited my local Natwest branch. The bank manager gave me a printout of all transactions during the life of the account and told me that I owed no debt as the statute barred date had long since passed. He also mentioned that the original debt consisted purely of bank charges accumulated upon a failed direct debit which was why the bank never took me to court. I wrote to CCS and informed them of this. Then CCS pass the debt back to Capquest who start chasing me again. I assume that if I go through the whole process again with Capquest they will sell it on to another DCA who will continue chasing me. I am tempted to ask Capquest to take me to court so I can turn up with proof of statute barred status as a perfect defence and then claim compensation for harassment.
-
Thank you Brig for your superb and helpful advice. I will do as you recommend. I am astonished how fast you responded to my post and I consider you to be a saint on this forum.
-
Here we go again. Despite me sending the statute barred letter and proof of default date to CCS Collect, they have passed the debt back to Capquest who are chasing me again. This debt bacame statute barred on 23rd May 2013 and the Capquest default was correctly removed from my CRA report on that date. I suppose I could send a statute barred letter to Capquest but I assume they will ignore me just as CCS did. Realising that both CCS and Capquest don't know the meaning of "statute barred" maybe I should ignore them and just wait to be taken to court. Alternatively, maybe they will never take me to court and continue to send threatening letters until I die of extreme old age.
-
Who exactly have I been rude to? Please post a list of members I have been personally rude to. You have accused me of being a time waster, how rude is that? I haven't accused anyone on this group of anything. However, if you know otherwise please provide evidence to support your accusation. I can't see why I should inform HMRC of their mistakes. Surely it's their job not to make mistakes and not expect private pensioners to put them right. You seem to think that it's up to me to tell HMRC how to do their jobs properly. Well I think it's up to them to become competent at doing their jobs and NOT up to me to help them become competent. 18 years ago when I was working with digital radio design I didn't need to contact HMRC to make me competent in my complex job. Therefore why do I have to contact HMRC to make them competent in a simple job that only requires simple arithmetic? I was using calculus, boolean algebra and complex analysis with my job and you accuse me of being a time waster? Cheers mate, thanks a lot, have a nice day. I assume your HND pass grade is better then mine.
-
HMRC are fully aware of my two pensions that don't add up to the income tax thresold of £9440. Therefore they are obviously punishing poor people in order to protect bankers earning billions of pounds and avoiding tax. I cannot understand why I should contact HMRC when they have proved that they are hell bent on taxing poor people. They would obviously ignore me and probably take all my pension in tax. Please learn to understand that Tories hate people who aren't worth billions of pounds. They class ordinary house owning people as worhhless brain dead skum.
-
252T is the tax code for the pension I have been taxed on. The pension is £2576 per year. OK I assume I am over the tax threshold and should be taxed. However my total pensions are less than the normal tax threshold. HMRC know this so they are deliberately punishing poor people. This pension is a civil service pension and HMRC are civil service therefore my pension provider can't get it wrong as they are both the same thing. They are both the civil service.......or are they?
-
I thought the income tax threshold was over £9000 per year, but HMRC have proved me wrong. The only income I have if from private pension which consists of two pensions that add up to £7,520 per year. I see from my recently received P60 that HMRC are deducting tax from my pension. Is there a lower tax allowance / threshold for people on low private pensions? I assume there must be otherwise HMRC wouldn't deduct anything. Around four years ago I was living on a pension of £4.500 per year and HMRC decided to deduct 40% of my small pension and allocated me a tax code of zero !! This resulted in me having just £51 per week to live on and pay my bills for several months. I assume that HMRC have a serious hate of people living on small private pensions and attack them as much as possible. I always assumed that working full time for decades, paying loads of tax and national insurance, not claiming benefits and living on a private pension would put me in the Governments good books, but obviously not! I have bought my house outright so I don't claim any housing benefit but I seem to be treated like trash by the HMRC and the Government.
-
I wasn't allowed to pay a large quantity of cash into a bank due to a satisfied CCJ. How bad is that? Huge numbers of people have been prosecuted for being caught by a speed camera and given a criminal record as a result. How breaking the speed limit implies that a person is untrustworthy with money is beyond me. However, the law is the law and therefore breaking a speed limit DOES mean that you cannot be trusted with money. I have had CCJ's for trivial amounts of money and have therefore been classed as untrustworthy with money. However, I have had four mortgages for huge amounts of money and paid them all back perfectly. I therefore realise that the law consideres me to be perfectly trustworthy with huge amounts of money but a totally untrustworthy idiot with trivial amounts of money. Sadly my perfect mortgage repayment record isn't mentioned on my CRA report, only a CCJ for a relatively trivial amount of money. Paying off the CCJ would not really improve my credit rating just as paying off four mortgages perfectly didn't help it either.
-
Hi Brig, that's why I said "I am of the impression" rather then a absolute definite allegation. However, thanks for your advice and concern.
-
Hi Brig, I forgot to mention that about a year after this incident I discovered that the offender's wife is very friendly with a Police officer who was involved the case. Sort of explains everything in my opinion. I am of the impression that the Police are as bent as a nine pound note.
-
Hi Brig, well the man who broke into my house was never taken to court so legally no crime took place. I did write to the Police asking for the details of their investigation so I could use the evidence to claim against the offender in the small claims court in the county court. The Police said that providing me with these details was not possible as it was against the data protection act. I therefore cannot see how any court can help me recover the cost of the damage caused by the offender. My house insurance policy has an excess which is greater than the cost of the damage so placing an insurance claim would be pointless. Seems to me that the law implies that owing a few hundred pounds to a bank or water company is far more serious than deliberate criminal damage. In my experience that certainly is the case and I have the paper work here to prove it.
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS