Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

Nihil

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About Nihil

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Actually it depends on the bank/merchant, all credit card transactions can and very likely will be reversed. Debit card payments are a little bit more tricky, and banks are not obliged to issue charge backs. Many banks will credit the funds to you immediately, then they will send out a charge back letter to the address provided by the merchant. At this stage no funds will have been reversed, the bank will essentially be lending you the money on faith that the claim is valid. If the charge back isn't challenged , the money will then be returned from the merchants account. If it is challenged, or if the bank decide it isn't fraud following an internal investigation, then the funds will not be reversed. At this stage any money given to the client will be taken back, even if this puts them into an unauthorised overdraft (unless of course the challenge fails, which is pretty rare. Most companies don't bother challenging unless they're relatively certain they are in the right). Anyway, sorry for reviving a dead thread but this thread apparently ranks quite highly on Google and isn't entirely accurate.
  2. I'd probably put this in your own thread with all the background history supplied. Sounds dodgy, and posting it in someone else's thread will confuse things further as most readers will assume it is related to the OP's problem.
  3. Of course they are a low priority creditor, I can't think of anything that would ever be lower priority, however has the OP shown any evidence to the creditor that this council tax arrears actually exists? Or that their situation would not allow them to repay the loan on time? If someone takes out a short term loan, then requests a payment plan within this time frame having claimed a substantial change in circumstances it is reasonable to request evidence. This is what the OP seems to have refused to provide Peachy. Your advice is also quite poor, you could phone any of those free debt advice agencies and they'll tell you the same. I don't mean to sound rude when stating this, but you've repeated it numerous times and I'd like the OP to avoid following it. Your assumption that I do not know the history of pay day lenders is also incorrect, however any infractions on their part will always be viewed on a case by case basis and will not take into account the lender's history. I will admit my knowledge of pay day loans is relatively limited, but it's still probably more substantial than many other's. I don't feel it's really worth me learning too much about them given that the upcoming CPA changes will likely end, or completely reform, this particular part of the consumer credit industry anyway.
  4. And yes, much of the advice provided on CAG is incorrect. A co-worker actually directed me to these forums for this very reason, on seeing some of the advice given to forum users her exact words were "people should require a license to post on the internet". Quite simply these are internet forums, and like all internet forums a lot of different users will post or perpetuate information sometimes with somewhat dubious working knowledge of the actual topic. I also don't really understand the relevance of your references to the information I'm posting, or the age of this account. Nor is the thread random, I was typing the names of various companies in to see what clients thought of them and "Peachy" returned this.
  5. My information was quoted directly from national debt line, and conflicts with your own advice, so I do not believe your advice is the same. In regard to the OFT, they advise only that creditors allow for "alternative, affordable, repayment amounts when a reasonable proposal is made by a debtor". In this case Peachy have given contact information for free debt advice agencies, and they've requested an income and expenditure form be completed to set up a reasonable payment plan. They've then essentially just quoted verbatim their terms and conditions in regard to charges because they aren't going to freeze the account, because the OP will not complete the requested income and expenditure. It is not a breach of any OFT guidance to refuse to freeze interest or charges on an account for a £1 per month offer, and it is not good advice to try and use offers of token payments as some kind of threat. In fact I would go so far as to say advising people to do so is downright irresponsible. Quite simply, advice like this is the reason that debtors who genuinely are struggling are required to show evidence of this fact. Because people like yourself advise everyone to make this offer, irrespective of circumstances, and you mislead them into believing the creditor is obliged to accept it or freeze interest/charges. In regard to Peachy, I'd question their 1-day overdue £25 fee. Or the weekly £12 charges that serve as overdue reminders, but given that they've agreed to waive these in this case it seems irrelevant. If they're applying them whilst you're clearly talking to them to negotiate a payment plan, you could probably make a pretty good case for a FOS complaint on that basis but I'd advise getting peachy to put in writing that they've been applied and that they refuse to waive them first. It might also be worth asking Peachy to send you their complaints procedure, and make a formal complaint directly to them in writing. FOS will be pretty annoyed if they don't issue a final response and that way you can get their intent, and everything they're requesting from you, set down clearly in writing. Other than that I'd say you essentially have two choices: Enter into a charges-free repayment plan with interest still being applied to the account Show them evidence of your change in circumstances, and if they refuse to freeze interest then make a FOS complaint DO NOT follow renegade imp's advice of arbitrarily offering £1 per month, if you do it will severely weaken your position should you make a complaint against the company as they will easily be able to show they had reason to doubt your offer was sincere. If you do decide the follow that advice, ring one of the debt advice organizations first and go over it with them.
  6. Unless it was one of the "do not reply to this address, it is not monitored" kind of addresses, you should be fine. Even then if it was not clearly marked as such, listed as a point of contact on their website or given to you by an employee you'll probably still be fine. Might be worth sending them some kind of letter challenging their claims, highlight that you have evidence of cancellation and that the bank supported you in reversing the funds and see what they say. I'm not sure who would be best to go to regarding this if they continue pursuing this, maybe give citizens advice an email and see what they say. Most companies will back down if they feel the cost of pursuing a debt will be significant, especially if there's a high chance it can't be enforced. This particular type of debt is a little outside of my area of expertise, but justified FOS complaints will usually also end in the company being forced to pay for wasting the clients time. So if there is any kind of regulator you can go to, I'd certainly do so.
  7. I find it strange that this is how you interpreted my post, but hey. Also, there is no point stating "I don't dislike them", and then essentially saying you dislike them in the very next breath. Some do engage in border-line illegal behaviour (and a few companies like MMF very likely cross that line at times), but this thread is not about that. This thread is about a specific lender offering a specific balance for a payment plan, and the OPs options in this regard.
  8. If you have proof of cancellation I really wouldn't worry about it to much, if the challenge the charge backs you've got the emails to fall back on so the bank won't undo their decision. They are more than likely just annoyed because the charge backs cost them money, as they'll be charged by their bank for it. It's their own fault for being silly enough not to cancel it in the first place or issue a refund when due though
  9. This is probably going to depend on your situation, when you say you suspended your account... Did you call them to do this? Go in in person? Do you have any kind of idea of the time or date, and are you 100% sure it wasn't something you forgot? And most importantly, what reason did they give for refusing the refund? If it was along the lines of "we have no record of your cancellation", you may be in a sticky situation. Is it a major gym with the resources or expertise to actually pursue the debt, and do they have a history of doing this?
  10. They usually only add an arbitrary time limit to prevent people saying things like "I want a payment plan that starts in June". In regard to making £20 payments on the basis that they will clear an unspecified amount, it's usually best to get them to state exactly how much they will discount for keeping to the arrangement. Reviewing the arrangement can also sometimes mean they will threaten to fail it if payments don't increase after the set period, not a particularly nice tactic but one that is hard to fight against if you've agreed to it. £20 over six months is also £120, if you think you can save ~£30 on top of that you could after this period offer to close for the £180 to make up £300? This would be a little devious on your part, but when making an offer like this it's usually best to claim a relative or friend is willing to lend you the money if (and only if) it would settle the account. If pressured to choose between £20 per month and £180 there and then most collections staff will simply take the £180 to save on hassle, and claiming the money is not your own will stop any questions regarding affordability of the £20 per month plan should they refuse.
  11. (Please note this is not aimed at you renegadeimp. I can see you obviously have a dislike for finance companies and I admire that, I'm simply offering some free advice to the OP.) For the sake of brevity I'll simply post a link to the below page and quote from it as required: nationaldebtline.co.uk/england_wales/page.php?page=35_options_for_dealing_with_your_debts (removed prefix due to my post count being too low) The first underlined part is essentially the reason they requested an income and expenditure from yourself, so they can establish exactly how much is reasonable for you to pay. If there is any reason to question information provided in the income and expenditure they may require supporting documents before accepting the proposed arrangement. Some creditors may also request documents to support your claim of a change in circumstances if they have any reason at all to believe it may not be true. And, contrary to popular belief, they are not required to accept any and every offer thrown at them. As for accepting £1 per month, they may accept it for a short time if necessary. Many will likely actually accept it for much longer if you have important priority debts to deal with first. You should also likely accept that them taking you to court is a real possibility. They will usually only do this if you meet a few set criteria, such as them knowing your current address (they may have this whether you've given it to them or not) and whether or not they believe you are employed. It may be worth googling around a little and seeing if Peachy issue large numbers of claims on a regular basis, if not you may be ok. Some companies don't. Either way, you should still probably phone one of the advice organizations that Peachy listed in their email to you. You will receive much better advice than could be provided on forums like these, especially given the limited amount of information you can realistically provide us and the unknown level of expertise of the posters. I would personally advise either Stepchange who can be reached on 0800 138 1111, or Citizens Advice on 08444 111 444. Both are free phone numbers, and both will provide better advice in a shorter time frame than you could possibly receive on here.
  12. I'm going to highlight the most important aspect of their reply email: Have you spoken to any of the organizations they provided contact information for? Given that you are apparently unwilling or unable to provide evidence of a change in your circumstances their offer seems reasonable.
  13. "Overheads" mean the costs associated with chasing and collecting a debt. If you do not pay x amount for a certain amount of time and they have to employ staff to chase you, pay for contact information to be updated or for legal advice in regard to taking you to court then your balance will increase accordingly. You can argue whether or not the charges are fair or reasonable, but they exist and are likely detailed in the terms and conditions of the original loan or available upon request. No. This. I'd advise against simply offering an arbitrarily low amount though, they may decide to pursue it through court or request evidence of your circumstances. Neither would be desirable if you are dishonest regarding the amount you can realistically afford. Also, in regard to the 7.5% it's simply the percentage they estimate could be collected of the loan book. The debt which cannot be collected may be due to the age of the date, lack of contact information for the clients/difficulty in tracing and portions of it may even be outright unenforceable. This does not mean they will accept 7.5% of your balance.
×
×
  • Create New...