Jump to content


EXPERIAN... The final battle commences


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4296 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Car2403,

 

Thanks for the info.... I am just looking into something but I think...and Im pretty sure that your judge has just shot the lenders and the CRA's in the foot with his judgement... give me a while and i shall divulge my thoughts..........;). Have you got a written record of his judgement you could post?

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 862
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Have you got a written record of his judgement you could post?

 

No - it's a small claim anyway, so I'm unlikely to get the final Judgment in written format.

 

Even if I did, it wouldn't be binding on any other cases, because it was a small claim, sadly.

 

Interested to see what you have, though - there is an appeal process, which I might consider just to push the issue, if need be. ;)

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok…. Sorry about the delay… just wanted to check something with my spy in the enemies ranks… and they (notice not using gender. Hello experian..still reading?) agree.

I know it's a small claim and not binding but it covers a valuable point on the definition of a default. Something i asked EXperian for in my last letter.

Ok the scenario is Car2403 turns up at court with GE’s solicitor lurching behind. Now the judge says that GE has an unexecuted agreement BUT it is capable of being enforced on the order of a court. GE still doesn’t ask or want this. However moving quickly on the judge says that the default itself isn’t and enforcement under the act so he won’t order it removed. There is some doubt about the amount defaulted due to penalty charges but he isn’t prepared to say if that makes them unfair or not till the OFT test case is finished. All clear then. GE’s sol shout ‘yaboo sucks’ at Car2403 and then runs off to the wine bar to celebrate.

All is well… except…

Lets look at it again. The judge is right. A court can make the agreement enforceable and he states that if asked he probably would do this. In order to oppose that order Car2403 would have to show that he had suffered due to unexecuted agreement. Quite difficult to prove. So he rightly then said that if he would order it enforceable then the CCA rules apply.

Ok moving onto the next bit… penalty charges. Well that’s up to the judges again. If he wants to wait for the outcome of the OFT case then he can. But it does mean that Car2403 can go back to the court over the default WHEN the oft win. So all hope not lost.

Ok now this is the interesting bit that I had to confirm… Car2403 reports the judge said..

Looking at the Default Notice, he decided a Default Notice is not a form of enforcement under the CCA - it's a precursor to seeking enforcement, but doesn't amount to an enforcement action.’

Oh dear oh dear oh dear…. Poor CRA’s and lenders.

I think the judge has got it right. He has defined EXACTLY what the CCA wanted a default notice to be. A means to and end. The default notice is the means ..the end is the enforcement by a court. So what if the agreement is unenforceable in its entirety. In order for the default notice to be issued there should be two musts.

  • That there is a reasonable time frame to enforcement (eg it should be put before the court asap)
  • There should be a realistic chance of a court enforcing it.

If neither or one of these exists then as there is no end and the means becomes it’s own end. It becomes a method of enforcement. It becomes a denial of the right to trial. A penalty inflicted by a body with no lawful authority.

This makes perfect sense. The CCA never meant defaults to be held for 6 yrs. They are only meant to be a tempory marker until a court enforces action. But the CRA’s and lenders have turned them into their own form of CCJ. Something never intended.

Interesting as well that GE have a precusor to enforcement against Car2403 (the default) but when they were standing in front of the judge they still didn't ask for a ruling on the enforcement of the agreement. What more indication does the judge need to prove that the default was being used as it's own end instaed of a means.

I think that they have unintentionally got a judge to define a default for us!!!

For those with unenforceable agreements this may be the best result so far!!!!

What price clever lawyers now chaps?

  • Haha 1

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

pre·cur·sor thinsp.png speaker.gif

–noun 1.a person or thing that precedes, as in a job, a method, etc.; predecessor. 2.a person, animal, or thing that goes before and indicates the approach of someone or something else; harbinger: The first robin is a precursor of spring.

 

;)

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

just got my report from Experian when i did it online. Now to make a start on that 'libel' letter ....

 

last time, they wanted proof of ID ... which i never sent so i never got the report.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, finlander.

 

In Court, I posed the question to GE why they hadn't sought enforcement via the Court, but had, instead, Defaulted my credit file and passed the debt to a DCA to collect instead. There was no answer fortcoming. I went on to get the Judge to adjudicate on the Default Notice being a method of enforcement, as, if it was, the enforcement couldn't have happened (Default Notice being issued) as there was no Court Order.

 

As it goes, the Solicitor was very interested in ignoring the enforceability or otherwise of the agreement - but the Judge was having none of it. "To consider car2403's argument, Mr Ross" he said, "we need to look at the enforceability of the agreement, whether you like it or not, I'm afraid, so that is what I intend to do".

 

Once the rest (which you've outlined nicely) was dealt with, then I asked the Judge to consider the impact of the Default (damages caused) given GE has never sought enforcement - I did that using the ICO's Techincal Guidance on the application of the DPA and the recording of Defaults. I'd lost the Judge at this point, ("Mr car2403, we've spent far too long on this case already", he said, despite this being 2 hours in to a 3 hour case slot on the listing!) so he just past Judgment regardless.

 

Your points are interesting in my case, but not binding on others or the CRA's.

 

Incidentally, I fully intend to challenge the CRA's retention policies, once I get over this result. I also intend to watch the OFT TC outcome with interest, as if that states the charges could be unfair and the Courts can decide that, I'll be back on to GE/Court/CRA to have this removed.

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Car,

 

I understand it's not binding but it raises the dreaded question they won't want asked. This should be used by all people questioning in future.. the questions to ask them are

 

1. Is this a precursor to legal action. If so when? timescales etc etc.and a guarantee that when you win the default is removed.(legal action lost then purpose and accuracy of a default has gone)

2. If no legal action what is the point of the default? If it is to notify other lenders it has now become a punishment on a par with a CCJ with no independent arbitration(a judge). This is flagrant abuse of the default system. Can you imagine the police charging a person with an offence(the default), putting bail conditions on him(the damage to your good name)knowing they would never bring the case to court because they had no evidence. There would be outrage. but the lenders and CRA's are doing it every day.

 

The lenders have no excuse. If aperson is genuine rogue debtor then take him to court. Its easy. takes a short period of time and the default warns other lenders whilst they get that judgement. If he is person in genuine dispute take him to court. It's easy . takes a short period of time and a independent judge will arbitrate. The default will again warn others that the debtor may be arisk.

 

But why on earth default someone and NEVER take them to court. It is blatantly a form of arbritary punishment with an attempt to avoid a court action. An therefore a blatant abuse of the system. It is niether accurate or fair and against all natural justice. I firmly believe that any judge will see this IF it is spelt out to him. Their is no other purpose in a default except as a precursor to legal acton OR as a punishment. If it is the last then only a court has the power to do that and it does with a CCJ.

 

Think what a default notice says. Its entire purpose is to say... 'PAY THIS NOW, COME TO AN AGREEMENT OR WE WILL GOTO COURT AND MAKE YOU'.

 

You cant then bypass the court and tell everyone about it for 6 years and ruin someones name. remember the 6 years is not a legal thing but 'industry practice'. What a surprise.

 

I am convinced that a default is meant to be temp maker pending legal action. It has been abused by the credit industry for a long time and I for one intend to prove it :)

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
Car,

 

I understand it's not binding but it raises the dreaded question they won't want asked. This should be used by all people questioning in future.. the questions to ask them are

 

1. Is this a precursor to legal action. If so when? timescales etc etc.and a guarantee that when you win the default is removed.(legal action lost then purpose and accuracy of a default has gone)

2. If no legal action what is the point of the default? If it is to notify other lenders it has now become a punishment on a par with a CCJ with no independent arbitration(a judge). This is flagrant abuse of the default system. Can you imagine the police charging a person with an offence(the default), putting bail conditions on him(the damage to your good name)knowing they would never bring the case to court because they had no evidence. There would be outrage. but the lenders and CRA's are doing it every day.

 

The lenders have no excuse. If aperson is genuine rogue debtor then take him to court. Its easy. takes a short period of time and the default warns other lenders whilst they get that judgement. If he is person in genuine dispute take him to court. It's easy . takes a short period of time and a independent judge will arbitrate. The default will again warn others that the debtor may be arisk.

 

But why on earth default someone and NEVER take them to court. It is blatantly a form of arbritary punishment with an attempt to avoid a court action. An therefore a blatant abuse of the system. It is niether accurate or fair and against all natural justice. I firmly believe that any judge will see this IF it is spelt out to him. Their is no other purpose in a default except as a precursor to legal acton OR as a punishment. If it is the last then only a court has the power to do that and it does with a CCJ.

 

Think what a default notice says. Its entire purpose is to say... 'PAY THIS NOW, COME TO AN AGREEMENT OR WE WILL GOTO COURT AND MAKE YOU'.

 

You cant then bypass the court and tell everyone about it for 6 years and ruin someones name. remember the 6 years is not a legal thing but 'industry practice'. What a surprise.

 

I am convinced that a default is meant to be temp maker pending legal action. It has been abused by the credit industry for a long time and I for one intend to prove it :)

Hi Finlander :)

I posted on another thread about my 'introduction' to Cabot. I think the letter they sent me is a perfect example of the misuse of CRAs, :mad:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/148467-sosumi-cabot.html#post1568877

Since sending the letter I've had letters of apology for delay etc from them, but they haven't produced a credit agreement, notice of assignment - nothing showing that they actually have the debt. Just apologies.

They say 'If you don't contact us within 14 days we will issue a default notice...' As far as I'm concerned my account is still with MorganStanley/Goldfish and I'm keeping the arrangement I made with them. I've heard nothing to the contrary from Goldfish either.

I know this doesn't directly relate to challenging the CRAs, but I think it adds to what your saying in point 2 above.

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think that the points I made have ever been tried in a court. I think that we have just let them get away with it for years.

But I am sure i am right. The CCA has stages to go through to make an agreement enforced by a court if a debtor stops paying. Its very clear cut

 

1. properly prescribed agreement

2. debtor breaks agreement.

3 default notice issued to warn debtor of failure to pay.

4. default registered.

5. CCJ to recover monies owed.

All these are designed to end in a court. To get a Judgement to enable the parties to know where they stand. I don't believe for one second it was meant that a lender stops at stage 4 and then continues to register the default knowing stage 5 is impossible due to a breach of the act on their part!

 

I also believe (and my advice backs me up) that if they knowingly do this then they are defaming your good name as are the CRA's by publishing it and refusing to take reasonable steps to withdraw the defamation after they have been informed.

 

I just think we have let them get away with it through fear... but when you think about it if they are in the right and allowed to do it they are truely exceptional. It would be the only avenue of life..seriously think about it.... where you could get away with it.

 

Imagine you were a tenant and your landlord had a legally unenforcable lease. He puts your rent up and you see in the lease he has no right and that no judge would allow him to. You dispute this and the landlord says he will take you to court. You say ok. He then evicts you (closes your account) then tells every other landlord in the country that you are a bad risk and don't pay your bills(CRA's) so you can't find anywhere else to live. But still refuses to take you to court. Do you believe

 

1.he would be allowed to do this

2.wouldn't get crucified in court for libel

 

Well...now go and look at your CCA agreement and your default notice and say hello to that landlord........;)

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds good to me reading it.

 

if i had a copy of my cca instead of an application form. and they proved it is legally theres to collect. hell i will pay it at a £20 a month that i offered them back when i got into big money troubles. .

 

i sent mr Hancock a reply back. asked if he things Cabot are so above boared.. how comes whilst accounts are in dispute can they mark credit files. request money and pass the debt to a 3rd part to collect.

 

lets see what you have to say this time. (we know your watching).

 

the peoples day will come without a doubt. maybe the CRA's want a long drawn out test case with the OFT.

 

take them to task. the more people that ask these questions. the quicker an outcome will be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, (as I indicated to my Judge, but he was having none of it - again!) if they have an application form that is unenforceable and Default you because of it, but never take you to Court, surely that's an abuse of their Consumer Credit License? Any company doing this should be reported to the OFT to be investigated, as they may be unfit to hold their license. Presumably, this argument can be used with the CRA, where they continue to share info provided by that creditor, in these circumstances, too!

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

HBOS did that to me, defaulted me and never made any attempt what-so-ever to take me to court. A point I've made to the ICO is that not only was my information processed unfairly but it's also misleading to potential lendors because it doesn't actually reflect my credit worthiness. My income has doubled since I got the default and I am off my DMP now and I'm up-to-date on all my accounts and have been for over 12 months. All the default really shows is that I had financial difficulties in Sept 06. To me a 6 year default is just a was for banks to "punish" you for not keeping to your agreement. I think this would especially apply to people who have been defaulted for very small amounts (£10 for example) it the information doesn't actually reflect the person's credit worthiness and surely therefore biases lenders and the data could be considered inaccurate? After all a default on your credit record does say to a potential lender that you simply defaulted on one agreement it a few years ago, it basically sticks a big flashing neon sign on your record saying "uncreditworthy" whether you are or not.

Edited by knoxvillain

[COLOR=blue][B]Defaultless since 2012 :)[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=green][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites
HBOS did that to me, defaulted me and never made any attempt what-so-ever to take me to court.

 

Every DCA does this .... as punishment because they can't/won't take you to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's almost as bad as a CCJ and should be stopped. The default should be removed after 6 months if no court action is taken IMO...

"To love unconditionally is the greatest gift, laughter is a close second" .To give your time to help others after being helped here is the best way to show your appreciation to your fellow CAG members.

 

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Seek the advice of an insured qualified professional if you have any doubts. All my knowledge has been gained here, for which I'm very grateful. I'm a Journalist, not a law professional.

 

If you do PM, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private ;)

BB 13 - DCAs/banks and solicitors 0.

 

I get a fresh start to get on with learning to live with severe disabilities when they could have had something if they'd been understanding...

 

<--- If you feel I've helped, please twinkle my star :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

who regulatrs CRA's? Is it the OFT or ICO?

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's almost as bad as a CCJ and should be stopped. The default should be removed after 6 months if no court action is taken IMO...

 

Yes, but the ICO agree it is fair to retain it for 6 years as 'industry practise'. Unless quangos back the consumer, CRAs are not going to listen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically, no one as far as I know, though the Information Commissioner can handle complaints about breaches of the DPA.

RMW

"If you want my parking space, please take my disability" Common car park sign in France.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's almost as bad as a CCJ and should be stopped. The default should be removed after 6 months if no court action is taken IMO...

 

I think this is where finlander is going with his view though, supported by you and I.

 

If a Default is recorded, which is a precursor to legal action and that legal action never comes, is it possible to argue that the Default itself becomes excessive after a certain period of time? Probably, IMHO, but we'll have a hell of a battle on our hands trying to convince the ICO that it should be less than 6 years.

 

Where does this 6 year marlarkey come from anyway? Is it based on the Limitation Act, which would limit their legal right to take action after 6 years from filling the Default with the CRA, or not?

 

There must be more we - and CAG - can do to fight this issue, especially with the OFT TC looking like taking years to resolve. In the meantime, so many people are being refused access to justice.

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the trouble with the whole consumer credit industry. There are parts that are regulated and we do welcome the new CPUTR 2008, though it's yet to be enforced even though it's law :rolleyes:

 

IMO, the whole system needs a thorough investigation and complete overhaul by the likes of the guy that drafted the CCA 1974 :p

Edited by babybear39
missed a bit

"To love unconditionally is the greatest gift, laughter is a close second" .To give your time to help others after being helped here is the best way to show your appreciation to your fellow CAG members.

 

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Seek the advice of an insured qualified professional if you have any doubts. All my knowledge has been gained here, for which I'm very grateful. I'm a Journalist, not a law professional.

 

If you do PM, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private ;)

BB 13 - DCAs/banks and solicitors 0.

 

I get a fresh start to get on with learning to live with severe disabilities when they could have had something if they'd been understanding...

 

<--- If you feel I've helped, please twinkle my star :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

the six years comes after the ICO and lenders made an informal agreement. To prove my poit it is based on the 'Rehabilitaion of offenders act'. Sound like a punishment now?

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

My big arguement is that filing a default as a punishment may breach article 6 of the human rights act. A brief look on the net shows that even luton local gov take this right seriously for all their activities. Why not the CRA's and lenders?

Right to a fair trial (Article 6) - this provision could have a significant impact in a number of areas: the handling of licensing applications and revocations of housing benefit and education appeals; in the social service field the placing of children in care, fostering and adoption, settling parental access arrangements; in planning a range of matters relating to appeal processes, the handling of compulsory acquisition of property and the investigation of potential regulatory offences.

http://www.luton.gov.uk/media%20library/word/chief%20executives/equalities/legislation/human%20rights%20act.doc

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

it seems to me the only time they will take court action against you.

 

is if they can't find you or they don't get a reply from you. then they will press for the ccj. apart from that they aint taking anyone to court. so threats of legal action should be seen as a reason to remove the default if they dont push for court action.

even though you give them permission and say go on then take me to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apart from my battle...which goes on.... why don't we as a group on cag submit a mass complaint to the oft regarding the abuse of default notices as a method of punishment without proper remedy?... how about it mods... a big sticky at the begining with perhaps 'copy this petition put your name at the bottom and forward to the oft and the ICO'. As I said before no other industry has this power. Why have we and are we letting them get away with it?

 

Argue with your bank and get punished for six years. no court. no effevtive tribuanal just a vested interest deciding they are OK to abuse the process!

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
Apart from my battle...which goes on.... why don't we as a group on cag submit a mass complaint to the oft regarding the abuse of default notices as a method of punishment without proper remedy?... how about it mods... a big sticky at the begining with perhaps 'copy this petition put your name at the bottom and forward to the oft and the Information Commissioners Office'. As I said before no other industry has this power. Why have we and are we letting them get away with it?

 

Argue with your bank and get punished for six years. no court. no effevtive tribuanal just a vested interest deciding they are OK to abuse the process!

 

 

i would have thought this is good option. but then maybe they might try you copied his letter hahahahaha

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4296 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...