Jump to content

boyfalldown

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    106
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by boyfalldown

  1. A little advice please. The jokers seems to have resurfaced on the same matter. And now claim to have sent me a CCA, and phone every day. As part of this settlement I have a letter from Sarah Lambert (the CEO of MKDP) which says Dear Boyfalldown Ref - Court Case We are in receipt of your claim form in which you have requested MKDP LLP cease processing your data, delete your information from any third party system and remove the default registered on your credit file. I can confirm that all of the above requests were actioned on (date) Pleas accept my apologies for any inconvenience this may have caused. Clearly that letter is not worth the paper its written on. Nor was MKDP's assurances they would not contact me on this matter again. Any suggestions how best to proceed. Other then going back to court and seeking an order, plus informing the court as to there behaviour
  2. The compliance manager is Lucy Brown. Her email address is [email protected] Just saying.
  3. OK - a little update. The defaults are now gone from my credit file (all agencies) and MKDP have nice complaints with the ICO and the OFT about them. All it took was a CPR part 8 claim requesting a court order that they comply with the data protection act or produce documentation supporting their right to carry on processing this data. I took this route because I was 100% confident that they could produce neither a CCA agreement (correct or otherwise) or a default notice and I thought this would probably be the quickest way. I did make it very clear in my poc they could not produce anything. Anyway, they settled by deleting everything within 4 days of receiving the summons.
  4. maybe worth checking your credit files. MKDP seem to have a habit of adding defaults out of spite
  5. don't take this as gospel. Mortgage debts become SB after 12 years so don't send an SB, but the council of mortgage lenders has stated they won't take enforcement action unless they start it before a debt is 6 years old. I wouldn't of thought they'd be able to get a CCJ (may be wrong though)
  6. A short update. I sent a written complain to the jokers, and also to the CRA's about this. As expected I got the standard 'Our subscribers issue, not up to us' response from the CRA's. Anyway jokers responded that it relates to a Welcome finance account which I've never had, and that they would obtain paperwork by today. More importantly they have made no effort to contact me before adding the default and claim they "would" have converted an existing Welcome account to their ownership with the CRAs Anyway - I've sent of complaints to the ICO and the OFT about their behaviour. My first question - do I need to exhaust the CSA route before going any further down the FOS route? I'm also going to send the following to the idiots, recorded. Can anyone think of any changes. Dear Idiots, On April 23rd 2012 you created an account with the CRAs and registered it as being in default. This despite my never having had an account with you, or as you claim Welcome finance. You claimed this default existed and you simply would of changed the name of the account owner on this date. This simply is not true. I have never had any dealing with you, or Welcome finance and owe you no money. In addition here was no account registered with the any of the reference agencies before this date. Not only have you broken ICO guidelines in restoring a default outside of a 6 month period you also seem to have registered a defaulted account before you held a consumer credit licence. I've bought this fact to the attention of the OFT and the fantastic untruths you have told to the ICO in my complaints to them abut your behaviour. I have also been far more reasonable then could be expected considering your behaviour. In that In February 2011 you wore to me regarding an unspecified debt, for an unstated amount. I wrote back to you on 26th Feb 2011 requesting that you proved this debt exists or did not contact me further. You made no further effort to contact me and I reasonably assumed you'd made an error which you'd now corrected. After a 14 month period this seemed reasonable. In April 2012, without any further effort to contact me you registered a default with the credit reference agencies. Despite you being in breech of data protection and the OFT guidance on debt collection in doing so. In another effort to be reasonable I agreed to wait 28 days for you to produce paperwork to support this alleged debt and default. You have failed to do so. You this reason please find enclosed a S10 data protection act notice to stop processing all of my data, reporting it to third parties and delete it in its entirety from your system. If this is not confirmed as complied with in full within 7 days of the date of this letter. (Friday 1st June) I shall issue proceedings in the county court to order your compliance. Lots of love BFD
  7. I had a different complaints manager Chris Cox Deputy Claims Team Manager Direct Line: 01908 821975 Switchboard: 01908 830001
  8. I may well be way off the mark here, but from what you've said I get the impression you were paying the judgement for a fair time. Just to point out if you've been paying this for 4 years, with the lump you gave as well then you'd have more then paid the debt off. Ask the jokers for a statement
  9. I've not checked noodle.co.uk yet, will do this afternoon. Theres no chat function for Equifax, but I have put in a complaint about them carrying this account
  10. Thanks Richard. dx this is what they've added on my report. I notice they've dated the update 23 Feb, but they actually did it last week, and my updates from Equifax show this
  11. nope - I only noticed it because Exquifax sent me an email telling me about a new credit account on my file.
  12. none at all I'm afraid. Even though the default is dated Sept 2009, they registered it, and the account with the CRAs last Tuesday, so I don't think in can be just a name change. I'd sent them a prove it exisits letter well over a year ago and heard nothing back, so assumed (wrongly) the'd gone awat
  13. I've noticed these jokers have registered a default with the CRA's for an account I have no knowledge of. They registered the default with a date of September 2009 which is before they had a consumer credit licence, so I'm rather assuming there is a complaint to the OFT right there. Default was registered last week, nearly three years after the default date. I also went back through my records and found the jokers had written to me in Feb 2011, and I'd replied with a prove it letter shortly afterwards. This was ignored. So far I've written to them, requesting the default notice, and also that they either prove it or remove it. I've also asked all the CRA's to remove (which I know they wont). Any suggestions for a next course of action?
  14. OK - silly question time, the section you've referenced refers specifically to the magistrates act so why would it have meaning in a county court setting? I'm sure what they're getting at is an option to use bailiffs but why the terminology
  15. No idea what a warrant of control is, TBH at a guess I'd say they're making it up. If they issue a claim in Cardiff, and you defend the case will automatically be transfered to your local county court. They still have to issue a summons as normal, and you have to defend should they do so, but this would be by post. Anything from there on in would be local to you
  16. Thank you Jasper, will follow the bank route to get the info, and also insist they provide details of the judgement
  17. another good question, at the scene we exchanged names and addresses. There was no damage following a very minor bump. No idea why they are involved - no-one made any contact with me to say they'd being some damage we were initially unaware of or anything else, but I did move some three months later. I also know I received a HORT 1 form, at around the same time, following passing through a ANPR recognition check and was stopped straight away as a result of been flagged, so I can only assume for whatever reason my policy details weren't stored on whatever database at that time, but produced all documents ok with no action. (The HORT 1 and the accident were completely unrelated). It was a fair while ago, TBH I've no chance of producing evidence of insurance from back then now and I've lived at this address, with insured cars for 4 years now, so why the MIB didn't contact me sooner is another good question
  18. sorry - I'm not being clear, typing too fast. I was insured, but due to a house move April this year was the first time I became aware of the issue If I am taken to court by the original driver with the MIB named as second defendant and judgement is entered against us, how can the assignment of rights include the right to sue again as there is no further cause of action, the claimant has already sued. This seems too simple to me but was my original question
  19. Thank you for that. I was uninsured but have no clue who I was insured with at that time. The accident was a minor bump which caused no damage, and the other driver and I left after agreeing this and exchanging details. This came to light in April this year and I'd moved 3 months after the accident. No effort was ever made to contact me. I thought as much re the statue barred issue, but it was the other lines I wanted some advice on. If I wasn't clear above then (according to the MIB, they won't or can't provide details of this) the other driver took me and the MIB to court as joint defendants and won by default. The MIB paid out in exchange for the other drivers rights which is why I have nothing on my credit file or against my old address. I *think* the MIB in buying the other drivers rights, have lost the right to take me to court as the other driver has already done so and won, but I don't think it can be that simple. I'd really love some input on this issue
  20. anyone - advice much appreciated, am a little confused by this
  21. Hi, Back in April I received a letter from these alleging a debt of £12,000 for an accident in 2005. I sent a reply and also a complaint to the MIB stating that the debt was both statue barred and as I'd never agreed to them representing me then I didn't owe them anything. I heard nothing in reply and assumed (foolishly) that was that. Anyway I received a letter from the MIB yesterday that they've instructed solicitors to take county court action against me. As of yet I've not received so can't post a POC. They also said something interesting in that letter, that the original claimant in the action had taken action against me, and the MIB as joint defendants in 2007 (news to me) and a judgement had been obtained in default. Registry Trust has no record of the CCJ but I'd expect this if the MIB had paid inside a month.This is where I need some advice though. I'm assuming this judgement effectively does the following. I can no longer defend on the basis of liability as this has already been decided by the 2007 judgement I'm not clear where I stand on the question of statue barred. Although the debt is old enough I assume this judgement removes this. Now I assume I can use the following in defence instead The original claimant has no further cause of action, by virtue of a judgement being obtained and paid. They have no further cause of action and therefore the MIB have no cause of action under the transfer of rights. This seems a bit too simple to me though. As the MIB were defendants in the case, they were equally liable and choose to pay the entire debt. I'll post the POC when it comes, as I'm sure it will, but would be really grateful for your thoughts on the above BFD
  22. Just to offer a little reassurance to those in this thread, I was contacted regarding a debt of approx. £12.2k to these jokers in mid April, they were using Banner Jones' solicitors to recover this debt. Despite their threats they seem unable to produce a single shred of evidence to support their claims and if you don't allow judgement in default, then I think a claim has very little chance of success. Banner Jones have an unhealthy relationship with CCM, in that they share some offices, some of Banner Jones staff are also permanently based at CCM. I've just also launched a complaint to the SRA about Banner Jones' behaviour with this company, just to give another route to follow
  23. I received a letter this morning from Banner Jones claiming to represent MIB. I can deal with that claim with no issues it statue barred and full of holes. But on reading round, and particular looking at this thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?287914-MIB-Close-Credit-Management-Claim-issued I noticed that the letter from Banner Jones was identical (word for word) as the one in that thread from Close Credit including contact numbers. The address on that headed paper is a PO box, and not any one of the offices Banner Jones list on their website, but very close to Close Credit's offices. When the post office are next open I'll trace the PO box number on the letter exactly. If Banner Jones are allowing Close Credit to send out documents using the Banner Jones headed paper then presumably this is misrepresentation and I should lodge complaints with the SRA regarding Banner Jones's behaviour and the OFT regarding Close Credits behaviour? H
  24. Its bbeen a while since I posted here. Joyfully I recieved a letter form these jokers for an accident in Mar 2006. I've never signed anything from them and I'm sure I'd remember an accident on the M25. Is the best route to initially go down the statue barred line? As well as the advice here I was going to pursue a complaint against Banner Jones via the SRA. A worthwhile idea?
×
×
  • Create New...