Marlin trying to use the Rankine case- I think

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello Pookeymonkey!

 

Perhaps it may be worth sending HFC a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) along with the £10 Statutory Fee to see what that turns up, i.e. an Agreement and details of how HFC Assigned the Debt to Marlin.

 

I'd probably also send Marlin their very own CCA Request and £1 Postal Order, as the alleged Account sounds like is was and is in Dispute with HFC, so for Marlin to try to Enforce, they must have that Agreement. It must be the Original too, properly executed, and not some crabby copy.

 

No Original Agreement = No Enforceable Debt.

 

Failure to respond to that Statutory Request lands them straight into hot water with the 2008 CPUT Regulations if they continue to make Demands for Payment after the 12+2 Working Days.

 

Who knows what "Recent High Court Judgement" they are referring to! It sounds like the Rankine Judgement but, they didn't say, did they!

 

It's not your job to read their minds. They could be making it up and wholly unaware of Rankine, not that Rankine bad law Judgement changes the core issues anyway.

 

I'd just play this by the book, stick to your guns that the alleged Account is firmly in Dispute with HFC, and just for good measure, send Marlin a CCA Request anyway, to make sure they are forced into a corner by the 2008 CPUT Regulations.

 

And don't forget to keep it all in Writing, and Log/Record any Telephone Calls these people do make.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Cheers,

BRW

[banker_rhymes_with]

I do agree the CCA to Marlin should not be required in this case. But, given the 2008 CPUT Regulations, I find it helps to put DCAs firmly on their back foot if they get their very own CCA from the moment they pop up to have a toot.

 

For me, at least, that's £1 well spent. If nothing else, it helps to concentrate their minds and can stop a lot of DCA ping pong via Letter.

 

In my case, two DCAs, so far, have handed alleged Debts straight back to the OC on being handed their own CCA Request. Neither wanted to press the point after that.

 

But, fully agreed, there are several ways to tackle this, as outlined above.

 

Cheers,

BRW

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello Pookey!

 

Letter looks very good. But others may comment.

 

My feeling is as my original request was acknowledged and is still in default I do not need to send a new request.

 

I can understand that and do agree. My own feeling is by hitting them with a CCA Request, after 12+2 Days if they fail to come up with the errant Agreement, then they have to back off.

 

If they ask you for Payment after that, then 2008 CPUT kicks in, and you have a very clear complaint against them. Take the fight back to them as it were.

 

Sorry to labour the point. It's a Belt and Braces suggestion in effect, rather than something that you must do.

 

Cheers,

BRW

[banker_rhymes_with]

I would also remove the part that says you're pleased they can't find it. I know that you are... and they probably know it too.... but you don't have to tell them quite like that... lol.

 

Yes, probably better not to use pleased.

 

Better to say you are:

 

...absolutely delighted and wish to thank them muchly for making your Christmas come early!

 

 

Cheers,

BRW