Arrow/copes claimform - old HBOS Loan

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Transcom have a habit or writting nonsense letters and this seems like another example.

Andyorc has given you the information thay you need to research,so check the court and get a copy of the judgement, this is not imo going to alert anyone.

[MagnaCarta]

It would seem as if you are asking for help with an attempt to avoid paying a debt rather than request assistance in how to handle a debt you're struggling with.

 

That's not what this site is about.

 

What? This site is full of people wanting to avoid paying debt and to be honest, I don't blame them. In general, we have been fleeced for years by the financial sector. We've been misled, lied to, over charged and treated like cash cows. The worm is turning and I for one have changed my views on finance companies and banks totally.

 

Please don't come the high and mighty, I expect this attitude from a financial sector worker. People are struggling and being forced into debt slavery. The banking industry needs radical change and they only way they will learn is when the public start to hit back and fleece them too.

 

I've spent 18 months harassing a very large financial organisation trying to fleece me and now they get nothing out of a GBP 20000. I have intentionally avoided paying them and gave them a taste of their own medicine calling them numerous times a day, phoning their directors at home and sending letters with ridiculous charges I have lawfully started to bill them and harass them in the same manner.

 

I sometimes wonder if some of the posters on here are actually working for these Greedy, unethical Financial Companies and are here to dish out moral guidance - please save it and look in your own back yard.

 

We have Banks dealing with Drug Traffickers, Terrorists and screwing the public with the Libor scandal and we get dictated to about the morality of paying back a debt to these Criminal Organisations - Don't make me laugh. The Tax payer has had to save lot's of these large banks and this money has filtered down to their other subsideries , even their own in house and external debt collection agencies. Not one of these criminal Banksters have been given any jail time yet! Banks own more than we told. Research your finance and see who you are really paying the money back too.

Edited January 19, 2013 by MagnaCarta

[merlin100]

What? This site is full of people wanting to avoid paying debt and to be honest, I don't blame them. In general, we have been fleeced for years by the financial sector. We've been misled, lied to, over charged and treated like cash cows. The worm is turning and I for one have changed my views on finance companies and banks totally.

 

Please don't come the high and mighty, I expect this attitude from a financial sector worker. People are struggling and being forced into debt slavery. The banking industry needs radical change and they only way they will learn is when the public start to hit back and fleece them too.

 

I've spent 18 months harassing a very large financial organisation trying to fleece me and now they get nothing out of a GBP 20000. I have intentionally avoided paying them and gave them a taste of their own medicine calling them numerous times a day, phoning their directors at home and sending letters with ridiculous charges I have lawfully started to bill them and harass them in the same manner.

 

I sometimes wonder if some of the posters on here are actually working for these Greedy, unethical Financial Companies and are here to dish out moral guidance - please save it and look in your own back yard.

 

We have Banks dealing with Drug Traffickers, Terrorists and screwing the public with the Libor scandal and we get dictated to about the morality of paying back a debt to these Criminal Organisations - Don't make me laugh. The Tax payer has had to save lot's of these large banks and this money has filtered down to their other subsideries , even their own in house and external debt collection agencies. Not one of these criminal Banksters have been given any jail time yet! Banks own more than we told. Research your finance and see who you are really paying the money back too.

 

Very much spot on. That certainly takes care of any "morality" issue

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Magna Carta,

 

The poster you refer to is a longstanding and respected memeber of the CAG site team and most certainly does NOT have any connection to the debt collection and is entitled to his opinion on your post and as you say you have spent 18 months in avoiding paying debt so that is open to comment.

[seanamarts]

CAG does not condone debt avoidance, this is not why CAG was set up.

 

Poster/members need to understand that debt companies read these forums regularly and have used members post against them when conducting court procedures.

 

If you are unsure of the forum rules please read them here

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

:thumb:

CAG does not condone debt avoidance, this is not why CAG was set up.

 

Poster/members need to understand that debt companies read these forums regularly and have used members post against them when conducting court procedures.

 

If you are unsure of the forum rules please read them here

[merlin100]

Can we keep this thread in perspective guys?

 

First of all, I didnt ever try to avoid my debts - I did make this clear.

 

When my situation drastically changed (actually it was overnight), I tried my damned hardest to address this situation with many calls to my creditors asking primarily for a temporary mutual agreement until such time as I was able to get myself back into a position where I could once again. meet the demands of the Agreements. And as Im sure you all know, theres not much else that the "little man" can do.

 

It wasnt long before I realised that banks and just about any other financial institution are simply not interested in any form of temporary financial mitigation and are only interested realising their losses any way they can.

In a very short space of time, my debts were "sold on" or "outsourced" not to one DCA, but to multiple DCAs all demanding different amounts of cash, and over a relatively short period of time, this became very confusing as I really was beginning to lose track of what I owed and indeed to whom.

Couple all this with the continual threats of court action, wage restraint, constant further "incurred charges", - the list is almost endless!

 

This, out of desperation, is what brought me to CAG. And since becoming a member, I quickly learned that there were many more people suffering the immoral way of our finance industry.

Im sure most Caggers will agree that we are fighting an industry with very little morality or compassion. So "throwing ourselves at their mercy" is certainly not the way to go!

There are far more horror stories on CAG than there are mutual arrangements. Theres a plethora of posts dealing with unlawful charges, forced PPI, dodgily written agreements, telephone threats, lies, deceptions, - again the list is endless.

So faced with this, what can the "little man" do? Nothing really other than learn fast and fight back with the few legal tools we have. But a shrewd "little man" soon realises that these few legal tools coupled with the correct protocols and proceedures can be powerful weapons. But thats not only because the "little man" actually has a legal recourse. Its very much down to the deliberate and persistent deceptions of the finance industry - they are the ones that continually trap themselves in corners because of their incessant drive to extract as much cash out of the general public without much regard for future consequences.

It isnt people like me that have the legal power to generally beat a bank or other financial body - they do that themselves on a very regular basis.

The shrewd "little man" knows this. Its not that easy to force a bank, or even a DCA into a corner, but why try when its an almost certainty that they will do that themselves? Its the shrewd man that lets them walk that line - and then knows how to keep them there.

Their greed is their own undoing. And I do wonder if they ever realise that should the day come when they learn to understand that a persons situation can change radically, sometimes without warning, and act accordingly, they would probably make more money that they are currently doing now.

But why bother when they can offset an individuals debt against their tax liability, thereby losing nothing, and then sell it on to a DCA for even more cash?

Immorality again.

I care more about the families etc going through the uncaring DCA hell of constant threats, in particular the threat of home repossession usually trotted out at a very early stage and causing unecessary fear and strain perhaps on a family already at breaking point. They tried it with me - a single dad with 3 kids to bring up who had just lost £1000 a month income thanks to a spiteful and selfish partner. None of that was my fault, but neither was it the fault of my creditors, and thats how I initially tried to address the situation. I soon learned I was very much on my own when it came to addressing my financial situation. So I found CAG and learned very fast.

And to anyone reading this who is now going through what I, and many others have been through. Read everything on this site, dont be intimidated by the DCAs etc, because 99% of it is just that - intimidation. Learn the correct proceedures and learn how to go forward in the rare circumstances that a DCA can correctly respond.

Be shrewd and NEVER make the first move. Let them bury themselves with multiple demands for multiple amounts from multiple DCAs - all for the same debt. They do it all the time. Dont become confused by it, they are simply confusing themselves. That deliberate confusion may serve you well in the future

[Nishikigoi]

I've had Transcom asking for a 10 year old phone debt on a handset they sold was faulty and they refused to replace it within the 12 months. They are just another SB chasing pond dweller...

 

As for banks etc, yes they have had the 'golden years', it's funny that I've got about £600 of enforceable debt that I have been paying off but at the same time our household coughed up £40,000 when we bailed the banks out from the tax man.....but my council are too poor to fill in the pothole outside, been told that's in 2016!

 

I went to ALL my creditors when things went wrong and everyone apart from First Direct did not want to know, even First Direct tried to get my wife to sign for joint liability and tried again to combine our joint account with a loan and credit card. It took a huge effort to stop them and about £400 of solicitors letters, that ultimately they had to pay back and even then tried to say they would offset these against a debt...er NO!

 

Last year saw Lowells and Crapquest drop off the radar and I have another to go in September and a CCJ that I should have contested goes in March. The point is that I'm still paying the £600 debt @ £20 per month, it was £2500 and I will be paying every penny of that debt for another few years to come when the CCJ's and about £40,000 is ancient history.

 

The point is that had these banks, loan and credit cards been reasonable, they would have been getting their money and I'd be paying right now, but they were not. Not only did they keep chucking £1000's at me, compounding the problem when I called to say I could not cope, then they would 'consolidate' with a 'new' loan of say £10000 and then post an un-requested credit card with ANOTHER £10,000.

 

So drunk with lending that for those of us in the pre-2007 paperwork days, they could not be bothered to keep the paperwork to enforce the debt, it was just a money making ride and no room or pause to think it might ever end. Some consumers were greedy too, everything was on credit others became vulnerable and easy credit was too good to be true when you did not know where next months mortgage was coming from or how you were going to feed your kids that week.

 

We should have followed Icelands example (no not fish fingers! ) and made them do 'Porridge'

 

http://current.com/blog/93947176_icelands-economy-recovering-well-after-bankers-jailed.htm

Edited January 20, 2013 by Nishikigoi

[Old Cogger]

Over heard the other night, BUT councils have funds stashed away off shore accounts, a few got caught out, but most were not, that from an 80+ year old well to informed gentleman, so why not use some in emergencies or is it for the benefit of Councillors Pensions etc? i.e. I am alright Jack!

[merlin100]

Hi all,

I receive another missive from Transcom regarding a CO and would just like a bit of info on this if you dont mind.

 

First of all, they are offering me a discount of 25% if I can pay the remainder in one installment and will instruct their "solicitors", HLLC to proceed with removal of the charge.

The original CCJ will reach the six years period next year thereby possibly causing them some grief should they attempt to collect on it through the courts in the future.

You wouldnt think this would mean much anyway considering that there is a CO on my house - but maybe it does? Could the weakening of the original CCJ (after 6 years) have any knock-on effect on the CO?

 

Transcom has included in the letter two all-encompassing paragraphs designed to get me to at least pay something, the first saying-

"If you are interested in this offer but unable to meet this amount or make the payment in one transaction, please contact us on the telephone number below so we can discuss alternative options with you "

 

Then they finish the letter-

" Please contact us regardless of your circumstances so that you can repay your outstanding balance"

 

So the question is that now Im getting offers of discounts on a CO that is secured on my home, could this mean that something may be wrong at the DCA end?

Could the original CCJ be a cause for concern for them now its into its fifth year of existence and if so, once it passes that six-year period could that have any weakening effect on the CO?

 

Or maybe its nothing more than a skint DCA trying to get a few bob in by any means?

Cheers all.

[dx100uk]

seems very strange

 

what was the original debt all about

 

dx

[DonkeyB]

Could the weakening of the original CCJ (after 6 years) have any knock-on effect on the CO?

 

No, As mentioned previously, the CO crystallises the CCJ. The point of a CO is that the creditor gets their money when the asset is sold and equity realised, whenever that happens.

 

But the six year timeframe does mean they would not be able to enforce easily (if at all) through the courts, other than by an order of sale based on the CO (but that would be unusual).

 

I’m assuming this is a full CO, rather than a restriction (ie. a restriction is likely if you joint-own the house with your spouse, for example). A restriction would not stop you selling your property.

[merlin100]

seems very strange

 

what was the original debt all about

 

dx

 

Hi Dx,

 

do you know, I honestly cant remember exactly.

 

Its been passed around so many DCAs.

 

Arrow Global have held it for most of the time, looks like they still have it too as Transcom are "representing" them in this latest letter.

 

 

Actually, the opening line says "We act for the above client in this legal matter".

 

Well they must have carte blance to do whatever they like with it if they can offer all kinds of discounts and compromises considering its compounded by a CO.

 

Just trying to work out why they would offer me a 25% discount on a debt that is 100% secured against my property.

[dx100uk]

17 threads on the same debt merged

 

please keep to THIS THREAD

for any further issues relating to this CCJ/CO

 

dx

[merlin100]

Hi guys and gals,

can someone please explain the importance, even seriousness, of a CCJ passing the six year mark with no attempt at collection by the creditor?

Ive read on CAG on a few occasions that it can cause the creditor complications should they legally try to collect on a CCJ thats sort of been "dormant" for at least six years.

 

I ask because Ive got 4 of them from pre-CAG days and upon checking on the Registry Trust site I find that one was issued on 08/2007, another on 03/2008, another on 04/2008 and the last one 07/2008.

So as you can see, theres only one left with a couple of months to run before that too passes six years with no activity from the creditor.

 

Now to complicate things further, two of them progressed to COs, although Im not completely sure which two, and I would assume the COs overide the CCJs anyway so they will be pretty much irrelevant to this question.

But what if the creditors of the other two finally come calling? Would I have a legal defence or is the outcome purely dependent on how a judge might feel on a particular morning?

Another question is this, has it ever been known for a CO to have a time limit? Personally I would doubt that but if someone corrects me - :-)

Thanks all

[Bazooka Boo]

IMO, any CCJ that has been awarded is usually followed up with some kind of action pretty quickly.

 

If they leave it for years and in any case 6 years then they will need to go back to the judge in order to explain why they didn't chase it up sooner in order to get the judge to resubmit the judgement.

[merlin100]

Hi guys,

Lowells have sent a threatogram demanding payment of £8.5k on a CCJ issued through Northampton in July 2008

(in the days before I found CAG and its great members).

 

Apart from the odd letter threat from occasional "solicitors", to which Ive never responded, there has never been any attempt to collect on this CCJ.

 

Now, I need a little clarity regarding the Stat Barred rule if you dont mind -

 

Im fully(?) aware of the above rule and have successfully used it in the past,

but there seems to be a grey area when applying it to a CCJ.

 

 

Is the Stat Barred rule as legally binding on a CCJ as it is on a simple contract or is it nothing more than a convenient solution for a judge

to apply should a situation like this one land on his desk?

 

Im not too worried about Lowells, but its better to be fully aware of the legal standing on a situation like this. So can anyone clear this up?

 

Ive had a good look around CAG and other sites but there doesnt seem to be any definitive legal clarification on the relationship between a CCJ and the Stat Barred rule.

 

 

I get the impression that the Stat Barred rule is implemented more through convenience than legal standing.

 

 

So if Im wrong can anyone point me in the right direction?

 

Thanks all

[silverfox1961]

Hi

In my opinion, the SB rules do not apply to CCJ's however a xreditor would have had plenty of time in the previous 6 years to enforce the CCJ and chose not to therefore my feeling is that they would have to go back to court for permission to enforce which a judge would possibly throw out as they have had plenty of time before to do so.

[BankFodder]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?127020-Old-County-Court-Judgements

[dx100uk]

who is the claimant on the CCJ?

 

 

when a CCJ is issued the SB clock stops.

 

 

however, there little evidence bar 1 case I think

where a judge allowed enforcement after 6yrs

 

 

and even less chance if the current chaser was not the claimant

 

 

been covered here loads of times.

[merlin100]

Hi all and thanks for the replies.

 

You seem to confirm what Im already thinking.

That theres no relationship between Stat Barred and a CCJ over six years old.

 

 

So in reality, although this rarely happens, there would be nothing to stop a court enforcing a CCJ after all this time other than a sense of fairness?

 

So imagine Lowells chancing their arm and taking it back to court, would a defence simply be a plea for unfairness?

 

Dx, the original creditor was RBS. Dont know if they still are after all this time.

 

Quote Originally Posted by The limitation acticon 1980 s 24 (1)

 

An action shall not be brought upon any judgment after the expiration of six years from the date on which the judgment became enforceable.

 

Thanks for this link Bankfodder. I took the quote from post19.

 

 

Interesting that it uses the word "judgement" rather than "contract".

 

 

Surely that reference cannot relate to anything other than court action?

[dx100uk]

who was the original CLAIMANT on the CCJ

not the OC of the debt

 

 

lowells 'could' get themselves substituted as the new claimant

then they could enforce the debt

you wont get any chance to object to anything nor be warned.

however, as already said, if lowells were NOT the original claimant

then its extremely rare for substitution to be allowed after 6yrs

[they [the original CLAIMANT] have already had 6yrs!! - time enough!!]

 

and even if they WERE the claimant - it rarer still for enforcement to be allowed after 6yrs.

 

 

dx

[merlin100]

Hi guys, me again,

Got a letter from this lot today after a very long time of things being quiet regarding a CO that I got in September 2008.

It says they are acting on behalf of their client Capquest Investments LTD, the original creditor being Barclays Bank.

 

All they are asking is for me to put a payment arrangement in place with them. There are none of the usual subtle threats in the letter.

 

I still cannot afford to do this as I still cannot get a doctor to sign me off as fit for work. This is due to a rather nasty heart attack in March 2014 of which Ive now got two stents fitted in my main arteries ( I keep well away from magnets)!

 

They've given me until 6th August to respond and there's no threats of further action if I don't.

 

Curiously though, they want me to email them at [email protected]. Why insecured when they have already mentioned its a CO? Just curious as to whether its some kind of ploy or just another DCA cock-up?

 

As my situation stands. I have no spare income. Im living on DLA, something I never though I would have to do but I guess life throws a spanner in the works from time to time.

Just wondered does anyone have any advice regarding my situation or is it best to continue to ignore these letters? Ive had a couple over the years from various DCAs, ignored them and they've gone away for a while .

 

If they eventually decide to take further action, what would be the likely outcome in Court bearing in mind my medical position and the fact that the debt is secured to my property?

Thanks all.

[dx100uk]

Thread 22 since 2009

Merged with all the others on exactly the same ccj/co questions

 

Suggest you read through this thread.

 

Lost count of the numbers of times its been answered

 

DX

[dx100uk]

Bottom line is ignore them

 

Dx