Jump to content

coolcity

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About coolcity

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks, I've read the info from the link, nothing I wasn't aware of really. I wouldn't talk to a DCA anyway or anybody else over the phone for just about anything, hence the reason I refused to give them my details when they rang up. The only "conversation" I had was when they rang me and asked me to confirm my details, which I refused to do because it could have been anybody on the phone and as I said, I'd never heard of them anyway at that point. I asked them to contact me in writing, if they wished to pursue the matter, with "a copy of the Agreement
  2. No, I haven't moved anywhere. Please stop jumping to conclusions, it's not helping. It's not in my interest to say I didn't receive the said Notice of Assignment, but even if I had I would have reached the same conclusion. When I get chance I'll scan it and post it, then you tell me in an age when s-c-a-m-s are rife if you believe a plain paper letter is genuine, especially after the card issuer said they had never even heard of the name on the letter? I appreciate I might have been talking to an operator who probably wasn't even aware what her own mana
  3. Eh? I haven't read anything anywhere else. I'm simply saying that I have no word from the original creditor that they have sold or transferred the debt so I'm not convinced by what the DCA says. Why should be? Or would you just hand over £3k to somebody you had never heard of and the original creditor failed to verify?
  4. Hi guys, A well known DCA, which I've read a lot about now but never heard of previously, contacted me asking for almost £3000 repayment of a credit card debt. I replied stating that I had never heard of them and therefore assumed it was a [problem]. Notably I have never been contacted by the credit card issuer to say they had transferred the debt to this DCA. The DCA asked me to call them but when I did they wanted my date of birth etc., and as I assumed it was a [problem] there's no way I was going to tell them anything, in my opinion it was up to them
  5. Thanks, I'll take a look but no, I'm pretty sure it wasn't a Council Tax Act or Regulation. EDIT: No that's definitely not it
  6. Fair comment, but I've reiterated a number of times since that my question, the purpose of my post, has nothing to do with bailiffs; that's the point. I didn't post the whole tale, i.e that I've made arrangements to pay the council regardless of anything else because it's not the point of the post. As I said earlier I'm sorry I mentioned bailiffs because a lot of people have gone off at a tangent which is exactly what I knew would happen if I started to discuss he actual details of the case.
  7. Oh for gawd's sake can we drop it already? I have repeated time after time after time after time that THIS IS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BAILIFFS. They are NOT involved, I've done what I need to do, i.e. a payment arrangement with the council to prevent it going any further. THAT IS NOT THE POINT HERE AND IS NOT WHAT OR WHY I'M ASKING SO PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE WILL EVERYBODY STOP TRYING TO READ BETWEEN THE LINES AND STOP JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS!!! The ONLY reason I mentioned it at all is because I knew everybody would start jumping in and talking about bloody bailiffs if I didn't post any case d
  8. WOW! That's a relief selectric, thank you. You know when you just know you're right about something but can't find any proof of it? I was beginning to wonder if I'd imagined the whole thing but I was sure that if it existed somebody on here would know something about it. Yes, I would be very interested if you can find anything but there's absolutely no rush, as I keep trying to point out I don't need any specific help with my case at the moment, it's just something I'd like to find again.
  9. Ah, yes, I'm aware of that site now you mention it. Not interested, I've heard it all before. I wouldn't have found it anywhere like that, not the sort of place I hang around. They're only of novelty value. @renegadeimp, Thanks, but yes I'm aware of all of that, it's not the question I'm asking. I only wanted to know the official legal position on their "refusal" to accept payment as a point of law, partly so I could quote that law to them. I'm not looking for any advice on dealing with bailiffs, making payments or any of that. Actually physically making the payment (regardless o
  10. (edit) THIS IS N.O.T.H.I.N.G. TO DO WITH BAILIFFS, THEIR FEES OR ANY OTHER ASPECT. THE BAILIFFS ARE NOT INVOLVED. IF YOU DON'T GET THAT YET, OR DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE IT, OR ARE READING SOMETHING DIFFERENT INTO IT THAT'S YOUR PROBLEM. Sorry to shout but this is getting beyond farce now. How many times??? I also made no mention whatsoever of part payments. My question was bloody simple enough. Nothing to fear about me and courts, but that confirms you're reading something completely different into it. I'm simply asking if it's illegal for the council to refuse payment of c
  11. I'm not sure what FMOTL means, but I'm reading that as meaning that if payment is made (to the authority) then it shall (must) accept it. Correct?
  12. No, as I said when I looked at the Bills of Exchange thing I was pretty sure that wasn't it. I remember reading something along the lines of "not being able to hold goods in lein of payment" too, and there's nothing like that in the Bills of Exchange Act, so that wasn't it. It wasn't something I saw on a mainstream site, most of those sites all tend to be the same, i.e. you get the same basic information you would get from the gov.uk site or from Citizens Advice, but very little else. I think a lot of the so-called advice on those sites is quite poor to be honest. There's rarely an
  13. Yes, I guess that's a reasonable conclusion, but I have to reiterate that's specifically why I tried to emphasise form the off that it wasn't a thread about bailiffs, or fees for that matter. The bailiffs won't be calling in the near future, if at all (and they'll be wasting their time if they do), I've seen to that already. It's reasonably simple and for those who are currently struggling it's worth it to buy yourself some time if you need it. I shouldn't have really said we were struggling, that was misleading so probably led to people thinking I'm trying to "beat the bailiffs".
  14. You're the one who seems to be hung up on it. I haven't even mentioned any fees. For starters they have to write to us (complaince notice) yet, and not until that point will any fees be incurred. And as I said there are many ways to challenge those fees successfully. If you think differently I'm obviously in the wrong place. But you're still ignoring one major point. THIS THREAD IS NOTHING TO DO WITH BAILIFFS OR THEIR FEES!!!!! what part of that don't you understand, or are you deliberately trying to wind me up now? The whole reason I mentioned the fact is so we WOULDN'T get
  15. I've just had a brief look at the Bills of Exchange Act 1882. It's an Act of Parliament isn't it? I don't want to go off at a tangent but I thought such an Act could only be repealed, not superceded. From what I've read of it, that doesn't look like the one I had originally seen anyway.
×
×
  • Create New...