Jump to content

the_shadow

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    9,005
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Posts posted by the_shadow

  1. Looks like a microfiche copy of an mortgage credit card?

     

    I notice on PPI neither the Yes nor the No is ticked, would be interesting to see what they did in this instance, have you any of the statements that show whether PPI was being paid?

     

    No terms and conditions on the form so assume they are saying you had them alongside and they are referenced somewhere on this piece of paper. Actually I've just seen a reference in the declaration that states terms and conditions overleaf. Have they supplied the original terms and conditions separately?

     

    S.

  2. MaxxPower,

     

    I think its slightly different with school holiday pricing, the dates are known and its factored into the budgeting/costing the airlines do so that people who travel outside of those times probably get a subsidised ride on the back of the families that have to travel on those dates.

     

    With the footie/Olympics its a one off or a moving date/time so probably not subsidising the other weeks as the school holiday travel does but rather pure profiteering.

     

    Thats my take on it anyway... would be good to find someone in the industry who could confirm/deny the school holidays costs help subsidise the other weeks/months travel

     

    S.

  3. The trust register should give a reference and the court that issued the CCJ, you would then need to contact the court by telephone and ask for copies of the judgment and claim forms.

     

    Now judgement has been obtained the original creditor or DCA has no legal requirement to provide you with a copy of the agreement although you could try a SAR to the original creditor, this might take up to 40days for them to respond however.

     

    S.

  4. As per Andy's comments it does sound like the original claim was sent to an address and as not defended a default judgment awarded. This should be recorded on your partners credit file as a CCJ. You can check details of the CCJ using the website I posted. With this information you can contact the court that awarded the CCJ (will show on trust website with reference number) and ask for a copy of the claim form and the judgement form.

     

    You will then be in a better position to know what exactly your partner is liable for and if interest has/is being added etc and can proceed as per Andy's instructions.

     

    S.

  5. Do the court papers say what kind of proceedings, if they have a CCJ already then its some form of enforcement, either a charging order or an order for him to attend court and give an account of his finances perhaps...

     

    You say the letter from the debt collectors state an outstanding CCJ exists, have you searched the trust register for details of the CCJ? I'm afraid you have to pay (£4 I believe) but its worth doing.

    http://www.trustonline.org.uk/search-yourself

     

    S.

  6. Data should be retained for 6 years after the account is closed according the money laundering regulations.

     

    The company that is currently marking your credit file is the current data controller and imho the ones who should be providing all the info in regards a SAR, I think you should threaten Citi with a complaint to the ICO if they dont play ball and advise them you will be reporting both them and opus to the FOS as clearly neither of them are sure where the hell your account records are, shocking state of affairs imho.

     

    S.

  7. Does it state "MAY" or does it say they "WILL" take you to court.

     

    If the letter states WILL then it does constitute a letter before action even if they do not then take that action. DX has read far more threads than me so will know more of how Morgans operate but it is a fact they do take people to court and sometimes even without the proper paperwork when they'll attempt to win by default.

     

    S.

  8. Ok I see, I was under the impression that a credit account could only be sold on if a CCA existed.

     

    Cabot cannot prove that they legally own the debt, which I think they are aware of, so in this case can I not request that they remove themselves from my credit file?

     

    I mean anyone could come along and say that they own the debt, but where's the proof? Cabot have failed to prove that they legally own the debt.

     

    MrSponge

     

    Sorry, the account is a debt, can be sold under the Law of Property Act, no CCA needs to exist to sell the debt just *possibly* to enforce it.

     

    The proof of ownership of the debt is the Notice of Assignment sent from the new buyer of the debt giving you the account details and details of who now to pay, they also become the data controller and start to mark your credit file at the same time, taking over the default or record entered by the original creditor.

     

    S.

  9. I have no idea why the telephone number goes elsewhere perhaps they have an agreement for any overspill of work to be farmed out to this other solicitor or perhaps one is acting on behalf of morgans in this case.

     

    Fact is you have been advised on court papers that Morgans are the opposing solicitors, along with this should be a registered address and a contact number. That company are the ones any application is raised against in the absence of a change of solicitors notification from them and the court.

     

    If you apply and it turns out someone else is dealing you would be entitled to claim the costs of application back from the solicitors in question imho as they have not provided you with the required notification, its not enough just to let the court know.

     

    S.

  10. Hello S.

     

    It's not the original lender I'm referring to here. I'm referring to Cabot who say they bought the debt in good faith and did not realise the account was in dispute, in which case the debt could not have been sold on to Cabot in the first place.

     

    Cabot do not legally own the debt but continue to update my credit file, and accrue interest.

     

    MrSponge

     

    Not providing a CCA is not a dispute as such I'm afraid imho, they were perfectly entitled to sell the account on, the only sanction for not providing a response to your s78 request is the fact they wouldnt be able to take you to court until such time they do.

     

    S.

  11. I'm afraid the short of it is you cant, unless you can prove you never had advantage of the money. various cases over the last couple of years have allowed a creditor to mark you credit file even without a CCA as its not seemed enforcement its allowed. If you were defaulted then after 6 years of non-payment or non-acknowledgement it'll drop off your credit file automatically.

     

    S.

  12. Is there any reason I can't view that link? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...-Viewing)-nbsp

     

    username44, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

     

    1. Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
    2. If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation. You may not have sufficient posts to permit you to carry out your intended action

    Would like to see whats happening?

     

    Yep the link goes to a restricted part of the forum.. try this one instead..

     

    http://govanlc.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/glc-unfair-bank-charges-update-phase-2.html

     

    S.

  13. Arrow as the new owner can default the account.

    By the time you received the NOA Arrow will have

    had the account for some time, the date on the NOA

    is not necessarily the date Aquiered the debt.

    You need to challenge the balance with Arrow,

    write to their compliance disputing the amount

    claimed do not admit liability to Arrow.

     

    There are always delays in entering these tranacations

    on the CRA vfiles.

     

    If shown the purchase date HAS to be accurate otherwise the notice of assignment becomes null and void.

     

    S.

  14. Actually scratch the s10 idea as they have a right to report just not inaccurately.

     

    I still say they have no right to default you, they didnt purchase this as a running account it was already closed and ceased, Egg should have defaulted you if they so wished, they were happy not to, so they(arrow) cannot provide the full functionality as an original creditor and hence lose the right to record a default, I might be wrong but thats my opinion.

     

    Raise a formal complaint with arrow in regards the default/balance being inaccurate and state you will complain to the ICO in 14 days if they dont correct, send signed for or obtain proof of postage.

     

    S.

  15. I've been thinking further about the possibility (or not) of it having been served; obviously we know it's not been handed personally to anyone. We moved 18 months ago so there's no way the new tenants would sign for something for us, they've already sent stuff back that's not hit the re-direct that's in place so for them to sign for something that needed to get to us personally would just not happen.

     

    It also can't have been sent Recorded for the same reason - they wouldn't have signed for it, and if it was returned it would have been re-directed to us (unless it's one of those 'do not re-direct' things in which case it would have gone back to Connaught and they'd be well aware it hadn't reached it's destination).

     

    Not sure that that means much, but I feel better seeing it in writing;)

     

    Sometimes its just helpful to see it writing and reading it back to ensure you are on the right path :)

     

    S.

  16. Hi Shadow

     

    No, it's my husband's BOS accounts that we disputed and stopped paying in '08. I have had to write after a couple of legal threats and similar, but have always headed it with the 'I do not acknowledge' line.

     

    I know they have no where to go with an agreement so I'm hopefully just waiting them out.

     

    Ok, in that case yes heading any letters with the I do not acknowledge tagline will NOT count as an acknowledgement of any kind. Any F&F offers however could restart the stat barred clock despite putting "without prejudice or adding the aforementioned tagline" hence the need for clarification.

     

    S.

×
×
  • Create New...