HBOS and OH's card debt

[lexis200]

Letter re ceived yesterday about the invoice and.....

 

They won't pay. I'm shocked, truly I am It is however their reason for not paying that I find amusing, and possibly rather helpful!

 

As they are apparently formulating another letter dealing with the application, I'll keep this going until I have that response.

 

so..

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated 23rd March, received today, that addresses one of my complaints contained within my letter of the 27th February.

 

You start your response by informing me that you are sorry for any distress your calls may have caused, and that this was not the intention. However, despite acknowledging that phoning me does cause distress, you go on to say that you will continue to do so in 28 days. Please explain why this is considered acceptable by the Bank of Scotland.

 

As you are happy to quote OFT guidelines that you are supposedly abiding by, please can you also inform me why you, and your representatives, have repeatedly broken all of the following guidelines and not once answered why you are happy to do so. Please note I have limited my examples as to include them all would take several pages.

 

Section 2.2

b. leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors' lack of knowledge.

Blair, Oliver and Scott, your representatives, have sent me letters threatening court action, and recently stating they will, under the Bank of Scotland’s instruction, be commencing legal proceedings in 7 days. You do not hold an enforceable agreement which precludes you or your agents from legal action.

Your colleague, Anne Gartshore, in one letter both admitted you do not have a signed agreement, and then went on to say you had provided a copy of the signed agreement.

g. ignoring or disregarding debtors' legitimate wishes in respect of when and where to contact them, for example, shift workers who ask not to be telephoned during certain times of the day.

Both the Bank of Scotland and Blair, Oliver and Scott have been informed on more than one occasion that I require everything to be in writing, and that to phone me is not acceptable. I have repeatedly informed you I will keep in contact via post, so you have no reason to continue phoning as lines of communication are still open.

h. asking or instructing debtors to make contact on premium rate telephone numbers.

Blair, Oliver and Scott, your in house collection agents, only give an 0870 number.

 

Section 2.4

b. falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when it legally cannot, for example, referring to bankruptcy or sequestration proceedings when the balance is too low to qualify for such proceedings or claiming a right of entry when no court order to this effect has been granted.

Blair, Oliver and Scott have, as I mentioned above, claimed they will be starting legal proceedings on their ‘clients’ behalf, when neither they nor the Bank of Scotland are entitled to do so.

 

Section 2.8

i. failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued.

Under both a Subject Access Request, and the Civil Procedure Rules, the Bank of Scotland and Blair, Oliver and Scott respectively have been asked for a copy of the original agreement, not the illegible application you have so far sent. Neither of these requests under either the SAR or CPR has been fulfilled, and the information requested that is pertinent to the account has not been supplied.

k.not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt.

I feel this is rather self explanatory given the contents of your letter, and the previous ones from your colleagues.

 

These are simply a few of the guidelines you and your representatives have seen fit to ignore. Please do not attempt to cover the harassment that the Bank of Scotland is plainly happy to endorse, by quoting that you work in conjunction with OFT guidelines, when it is very clear you do not.

 

I would also like to add at this point that you state you are working ‘in accordance with strict Ofcom rulings’, and as such are limited to one verbal contact a day. As I have informed your company before, I keep a log of all calls received. Please inform me why, if you are bound to follow Ofcom rulings, did your staff phone 3 times on the 3rd February, twice speaking to me, and being told to write on both occasions) and once leaving a silent message (another contravention of Ofcom’s rules). These calls have been recorded. I have other calls following a similar pattern relating to my other Bank of Scotland account, which I am not including here, so this is quite obviously a regular occurrence for your company.

In addition to this, as you are fully aware I consider this harassment, and am willing to keep open lines of communication in other ways, I have no doubt that you are violating Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003. Under this section ‘Improper use of public electronic communications network’ it states :

 

(2) A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—

© persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.

As you are well aware that I will not discuss financial matters over the phone, and have been informed of this both in writing and on the phone on more than one occasion, I can only assume your reasons for phoning are now in order to cause the above; this includes needless anxiety on the occasions where I have been told that regardless of the requests I have made for everything to be in writing, that phone calls will continue.

 

 

I also find it interesting that you refuse my charges of £5 a call as you have no contract which would allow me to charge you this. I see striking similarities in my complaint regarding the application you have sent, and your reasoning that as there is no valid signed contract there can not be a right to collect payment.

 

 

Moving on, I note that you have brushed off a good proportion of my complaint with a 4 line explanation of my concerns regarding the application sent to me. In addition to this, despite actually writing a letter to me that acknowledges the fact I will not contact you by phone, you give me a number to call in order to discuss the progress of it.

Lastly, you appear to have completely ignored my points regarding

· Your company’s deliberate actions of sending mail to a known old address

· The unlawful termination of my account following the issue of a faulty Default Notice

· The non-compliance with my original Subject Access Request

· The fact that in not keeping my agreement you have failed in your obligations to comply with the various anti money laundering regulations.

 

I trust these will be addressed promptly in writing, and you will not continue to ignore the points I have raised.

Edited March 27, 2009 by lexis200

[citizenB]

Well now.. Lexis, whilst I find your letter absolutely brilliant.. .worthy of an award in fact.. the following quote just was too much and I have splurted coffee just about everywhere.. Nice one. :D

 

 

I also find it interesting that you refuse my charges of £5 a call as you have no contract which would allow me to charge you this. I see striking similarities in my complaint regarding the application you have sent, and your reasoning that as there is no valid signed contract there can not be a right to collect payment.

[lexis200]

Well now.. Lexis, whilst I find your letter absolutely brilliant.. .worthy of an award in fact.. the following quote just was too much and I have splurted coffee just about everywhere.. Nice one. :D

 

hehe:D I did kind of feel I was writing the whole thing just so I could say that:D

[angel_1]

hey lexis,,,and ive told you before and i will tell you again,,,,you really need to set yourself up as an online letter writer - you could really start a good online business with your english language and directness

 

lol

 

thank the lord i HAD finished my coffee,,,, my keyboard would have been not a happy bunny,,,,,

 

laters all

 

angel x

[BlueSquirrel]

hehe:D I did kind of feel I was writing the whole thing just so I could say that:D

 

Perhaps you can say you don't have the signed agreement but presumably a copy of what they would have signed will suffice?

[citizenB]

I think I will borrow that letter Lexis. I have received much the same from IQOR regarding OH's Halifax account. Just one problem here. In the same post was a letter from Wescot, offering a substantial discount in response to the letter I sent them from post 58 in this thread

 

I have sent each company a copy of the other's letter and told them to work out who exactly Halifax has asked to collect on this account then let me know

 

Excellent!! Let us know what they have to say for themselves:D

 

lexis, I have updated my thread with the latest regarding this crowd

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/136980-time-take-halifax-credit-5.html#post2077401

 

Your opinion would be welcome.

[lexis200]

Perhaps you can say you don't have the signed agreement but presumably a copy of what they would have signed will suffice?

 

If I didn't think it would backfire on me I would love to have included that:)

[JRP1414]

Hi Lexis & Co,

 

Long time no speak! I have been so busy, I haven't been on here for ages and got quite behind with some of my bank stuff.

 

Anyway, it seems we have just about caught you up Lexis. We have been receiving a few anonymous calls the past couple of weeks from people in Preston (that's all they'll say to identify themselves) but it turns out they are from Iqor. The calls finally ended when I answered with the same greeting as my local Police force, which left the guy a bit stunned!

 

Low and behold, we then receive a letter from Iqor demanding payment for Halifax's account.

 

So that's a notice of intended court action from Blair, Oliver & Scott, followed by a request for disclosure under CPR (which of course they ignored), a 'debt notification' from Wescot, which was seen off with a bogoff letter and now Iqor. In amongst all this, we actually offered Halifax a full & final settlement, but received a one-liner declining our offer.

 

I just wonder how much longer they're going to keep this up. I'm actually thinking of invoicing Halifax for the time taken to answer each of their debt collectors' letters!

[lexis200]

Hey JRP:)

 

Sounds like you're at almost exactly the same point now!

 

Iqor have recently replied saying they are checking with their clients and will hold fire until they hear from them:D

 

I can't see a DCA anywhere who will be willing to hold onto this account TBH, so I don't think we've got too much of an issue there (which you don't either it seems:))

 

Not sure where to go now though. I don't want to just leave it as I want closure for personal reasons, but I don't fancy the idea of keeping this farce up for much longer.

 

You could always try invoicing them. I did for phone calls on OH's other BoS account, but they wouldn't pay as there wasn't a contract... I have pointed out the irony of that statement to them, given the situation we're in, but haven't had a response yet.

 

Lexis:)

[JRP1414]

Hey JRP:)

 

Sounds like you're at almost exactly the same point now!

 

Iqor have recently replied saying they are checking with their clients and will hold fire until they hear from them:D

 

I can't see a DCA anywhere who will be willing to hold onto this account TBH, so I don't think we've got too much of an issue there (which you don't either it seems:))

 

Not sure where to go now though. I don't want to just leave it as I want closure for personal reasons, but I don't fancy the idea of keeping this farce up for much longer.

 

You could always try invoicing them. I did for phone calls on OH's other BoS account, but they wouldn't pay as there wasn't a contract... I have pointed out the irony of that statement to them, given the situation we're in, but haven't had a response yet.

 

Lexis:)

 

 

Ha, ha! That's fantastic! It's not a contract when it suits them!

 

I guess it's just a case of waiting to see which debt collector they try next and then keep sending the same old letters. I just think it's really daft that they didn't accept our settlement. Granted it wasn't a massive amount but it was a damn sight more than they're going to get now!

 

Keep fighting!

[lexis200]

Well fat lot of good that did me!

 

Got a letter back from yet another person, as they are seemingly incapable of sending out more than one letter per person.

 

So, I had a bit of a re-group, and I've decided I'll get one last letter off to them, then either ignore them or just send them a list of my so far unanswered letters each time they write (obviously unless it's something that needs a proper response).

 

The thing is, if it would get rid of them I'd offer 10% or so as a f+f. I know I don't owe them a bean, but quite frankly just to have that weight lifted for a bit would be nice. Oh, plus I'm going to reclaim a load of charges later on:D The problem with a f+f though is that I think it's going to be hard to suddenly change tack and say I'll pay them something when I've flat refused to entertain that over the last few months, and said more than once that they can get knotted if they want any money. It's a conundrum:rolleyes:

 

Anyhoo, this is the letter I've done - I know it's long but I'm not intending sending another (or at least not one that takes more than 5 minutes of cutting and pasting!)

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated 7th April, received on the 11th April. Thank you for the unusually prompt response.

 

I must first ask if you are all trained to ignore questions raised and simply state the bank’s mantra over and over again, regardless of if the contents is actually correct or relevant?

 

In order to show what I mean, I will take your letter paragraph by paragraph, stating your answers and my actual points. I will end with a list of direct questions (again) for your convenience and so you can not possibly mis-read what is being asked. Please note, if I receive another letter that ignores or twists my points I will be sending your response to Trading Standards, as I am quite frankly amazed by your companies continued reluctance to address my concerns with any degree of interest or accuracy.

 

You wrote You state the bank has not provided you with the documents you have requested.

Correct, you have not. I am still not in possession of a legible signed contract complete with prescribed terms. I do however have more than one copy of an illegible application form void of any prescribed terms, thank you.

 

You wrote You are unhappy that Blair, Oliver and Scott have advised they will take legal action against you, when you feel they are unable to do so when said documents have not been provided.

Actually I’m more bemused than unhappy, as I am well aware that neither you nor Blair, Oliver and Scott have any way of starting legal action unless you provide me with my signed, legible agreement complete with prescribed terms.

 

You wrote If I may explain; you have now been provided with a copy of your application (credit agreement), and a copy of the current and historic terms and condition for the above agreement. This fulfils your request. Although you have disputed the legibility of the credit agreement, we feel it is fit for purpose.

I should point out, simply writing '(credit agreement)' as a description of an application form, and thereafter referring to it as 'the credit agreement', does not somehow actually turn it into a credit agreement. However, that aside, I do concede that yes, you have now (some 7 months after my original request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 was made) supplied me with all the documents that the CCA1974 requires. However, under a Civil Procedure Rules request, and a Subject Access Request you were required to send me a copy of any signed contracts, ie, my original, legible, signed agreement, complete with prescribed terms and conditions. I feel I am repeating this phrase over and over, and yet you and your colleagues somehow still manage very well to misconstrue the meaning each and every time. What you have sent is not the above; it is an illegible application form, void of any prescribed terms.

 

Whether or not the bank feels the legibility is not an issue, the simple fact is that in law it is. As I have stated before to one of the many colleagues of yours who have written – you may feel you are right, however I have legislation laid down that confirms I am right. All you need to do to stop me questioning this is to send a legible signed contract, complete with prescribed terms. It would seem like a simple way to bring this to a head, but perhaps the bank prefers these missives you send, full of mis-information and statements of the banks' feelings of being right.

 

You wrote However, may I advise that we are not obligated to provide documents. You remain liable for the balance on the account, and you are responsible for repaying the outstanding balance.

Please show me what part of a Subject Access Request, or for that matter a request under the Civil Procedure Rules, states that you are not obligated to provide documents that I have specifically requested? Also, if you are sure you have sent all you need to in order to show I am liable for the balance, why do you then take the time to say you are not obligated to send anything? That seems like a rather odd remark.

 

With regards to the remaining balance, you may be interested in some figures. I have calculated that some £5,555 has been used since the opening of the account, and some £5,885 has been repaid. Around £1655 of interest has been applied, but unfortunately without a valid contract this has been incorrectly claimed, and therefore should not be included on the balance. To show this, I would like to bring your attention to a quote from Sir Andrew Morritt, Vice Chancellor in Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 633. He said at paragraph 26 that in the case of an unenforceable agreement (which is precisely what you have for me):- The creditor must…be taken to have made a voluntary disposition, or gift, of the loan monies to the debtor. The creditor had chosen to part with the monies in circumstances in which it was never entitled to have them repaid;

Also, in the case of Dimond v Lovell [2000] UKHL 27, in which Lord Hoffmann said at page 1131:- Parliament intended that if a consumer credit agreement was improperly executed, then subject to the enforcement powers of the court, the debtor should not have to pay.

 

You also seem to have forgotten my rather important point regarding a faulty Default Notice and your subsequant termination of my account. In doing this you lost all rights to claim the balance and as such if you had an enforceable agreement (which you do not), you would now be limited to claiming the arrears shown at the time of the default.

 

In addition to the above, I have calculated the unlawful charges on this account, and with contractual interest they come to circa £1,155. By my calculations you are not only chasing an unenforceable debt that you have lost all right to claim on, but one on which Bank of Scotland actually owes me a not inconsiderable sum.

 

You wrote For the performance of the contract it is necessary that your telephone contact details are retained until the outstanding balance has been repaid. This being said, I regret to inform you that I am unable to guarantee that all future correspondence will be in writing only.

Leaving aside the fact you do not have a contract (and as your own colleague stated the lack of a contract was a bar to you paying the invoice I recently provided you with, I rather feel this proves my point), please be aware that I will not be repaying any balance as you are not entitled to reclaim it. Please also be aware it will be a massive waste of your time, and further fuel for harassment claims should you continue to phone, as I will not discuss this over the phone.

 

You wrote As previously explained by my colleague, in line with Ofcom rulings we are limited to a certain number of calls a day, and unlimited attempts at contact if there is no response. If the customer refuses to discuss the account with us, this is not classed as verbal contact.

Firstly, Michael King wrote that it was not classed as a verbal contact if security was refused. Your definition seems to be a little different, but I’m sure that is an honest mistake and certainly not yet another attempt to mislead me. Secondly, as I stated in my letter to Michael King, I did speak to two of your agents on two occasions on the same day, both times going through security and telling them to write. You seem to have ignored this in your response, and still seem to be under the illusion that you work within Ofcom’s rulings.

 

You wrote However, you account is currently being monitored by our Customer Priority Team…who take individual ownership.

I live in hope that this will be the case, but rather suspect that in line with previous form from the Bank of Scotland that my complaint will be sent to you, but dealt with by yet another person who doesn’t read what is in front of them. I hope I stand corrected on this account and actually get a sensible reply that addresses what I have written, but again, I sadly have no doubt that all issues will be broadly avoided whilst you tout the banks feelings regarding the legislation you have managed to conveniently ignore.

 

You wrote The account has not yet been passed to Blair, Oliver & Scott. However, it will be passed to them if the account accrues seven months of arrears. The account is currently four months in arrears.

If this is the case then why are they sending letters informing me of legal action for their ‘clients’ the Bank of Scotland? Surely not another misleading letter from you and your representatives?

 

You wrote As there is no valid dispute, may I advise that you set up an arrangement to clear the arrears on the above account…

Until you send the document I have requested, no. I should make it very clear though that should the document turn up now, I would have to question why it was not forthcoming for either a Subject Access Request or a request under the Civil Procedure Rules.

 

In order to save my time, as I am thoroughly bored with writing to you constantly as a direct result of yours and your colleague’s inability to answer simple questions, I am copying the bullet pointed questions asked in my last letter rather than go into detail about them again. Until I have a reasoned response to each and every one, any reply to your letters will be a copy of the questions I require answers to, or I will simply ignore your correspondence. Either way, further generic ramblings that answer nothing will not be dignified with a personal response, but rather the templated kind your company clearly very much favours.

 

For your information, the unanswered points were regarding:

 

· The non-compliance with my original Subject Access Request.

· Your company’s deliberate actions of sending mail to a known old address.

· The unlawful termination of my account following the issue of a faulty Default Notice.

· The fact that in not keeping my agreement you have failed in your obligations to comply with the various anti money laundering regulations.

 

I am not going to include the letters that state these questions. You have them already, and frankly as I am yet to receive a letter from the Bank of Scotland that shows more than the vaguest allusions to my issues, I am somewhat unwilling to assist you by including them.

 

However, so that I have one less letter to write to you, I will now add to these previous questions with:

 

· Why I have had the threat of legal proceedings by Blair, Oliver & Scott when you have apparently not yet passed the account to them, and when you have absolutely no legal merit to any action?

· Why you have not responded to my statement that despite the Bank of Scotland apparently only following Ofcom’s rulings, you still managed to phone and speak to me twice on the same day?

· Why you seem to be deliberately mistaking my request for a legible, signed, valid contract complete with prescribed terms, for a request for an illegible application form?

· Why you have not answered or defended any of the examples I listed in my previous letter regarding the many and varied OFT guidelines that you and your representatives Blair, Oliver & Scott have broken?

· Why you refuse to pay an invoice I have sent you for phone calls (after giving you fair warning this would happen) on the basis that there is no contract in place, but still insist on trying to elicit payment from me when you have no contract in place that would allow you to do so?

 

I will lastly state again that if you do not see fit to actually answer these questions rather than skirt around them (or completely ignore them), I will simply ignore your correspondence completely or will not be answering with anything more than my list of questions and points.

 

I trust this makes my position completely clear.

Edited April 14, 2009 by lexis200
cutting and pasting screwed up my formatting!

[Desperate Daniella]

Absolutely brilliant.

 

I particularly love the bit about "writing 'credit agreement' ..... doesn't turn it into a credit agreement" Wonderful stuff.

 

DD

[underdog13]

Just caught up on your superb thread, Lexis:)

 

Your letters make me laugh out loud, and as a precaution I do not approach your posts when any comestibles or liquids are in the vicinity to protect myself from choking and my laptop from short circuiting - strongly advise others to do the same.

 

I see Blatently Obtuse Shirkers are still giving you the run around, as they are me. Do you think it's a deliberate tactic to wear us down and make us pay up just to rid ourselves of their nonsense? If all else fails, irritate the hell out of people with complete gibberish until they surrender:rolleyes:

[millymollymoo]

Just popping in. As usual brilliant answers from Lexis to their incompetence.

 

Milly XX

[lexis200]

Thanks all:) - do you think it's ok to send or has anyone got any amendments that might be useful?

 

Hello again underdog, long time no see! (mind you I've not been on much lately). I think you're right, as I really can't believe a professional company could be this inept without some hidden agenda to work to. If it wasn't for all the support on CAG I'd have given up ages ago, so I guess it's a method that will work for a lot of their dodgy accounts when people are going it alone.

 

I can understand that they can't/won't just give up - that would only serve to set a precedence that they could really not afford, but for goodness sake, why not answer a simple question properly? Even if it's not what you want to hear, if they have a proper answer to something it's better than the rubbish they spout at the moment!

 

I'll aim to get that out tomorrow some time, and give it one last finger crossing that it'll do something. I doubt it somehow, given past performances and the lack of anyone capable of answering a question, but it's still worth hoping!

 

Lexis:)

[citizenB]

Lexis, this is as usual a brilliant letter.

 

However I fear that this will, along with all your other letters, either be "misunderstood" or ignored. I am wondering if this would be best addressed to the CEO at their Head office under an Official Complaint ?

 

I look forward to seeing their reply:)

[lexis200]

hey CB:)

 

Yep, I have no doubt at all that it will do bu**er all to help me, but at least they can't say they don't have all the information!

 

I had wondered about sending stuff higher up the chain, so I think I'll do what you suggest and either send direct to the top man, or copy him in and send it to both people.

 

Now to find out the name of the CEO...

[angel_1]

hiya lexis

 

and everyone,

 

sorry been a bit under the weather but im back with a vengeance now

 

oh my god,,,,,,,what have i missed,,,,FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABBBBBBB letter

sorry for shouting out,,,,

 

i think it will be best to send to top man CEO and recorded delivery of course

 

would love to be a fly on the wall when they read it,,,,lol

 

keep positive

 

keep happy laters all angel x

[tosh1]

subbing

[citizenB]

JRP, I think I am one step in front of Lexis and Iqor appears to be the end of the line so far.. I am waiting on them "completing their enquiries" with their client. As Halifax will only tell them what they told me.. I reckon we have a stalemate:D

[London000]

Subbing to this one aswell Lexis. Excellent last letter. You do get to the point where you think "Do your worst, you have no agreement, take me to court"

 

Another template I will be using...good luck :D

 

Hi Taz11,

I am already applying your method...3 notices so far but stil waiting...until they will lose. They go ahead , I follow them step by step.:p:p:p:p

.....get rid of me if you can....

DD

[lexis200]

Right, I haven't sent that letter yet - I've been mulling for a while (and doing some actual work:eek:).

 

I'm just wondering if it's worth it?

 

I think we can all agree at most it will get another vague answer that does bugger all for me, so I'm actually considering a shorter one (I know, not like me at all:D)

 

What I was wondering about doing is just writing, put the main points as simply and as legally correct as I can, then as a complete gesture of goodwill, offering them the arrears payable at the time of the default (that's the £59 odd - and obviously it would be my dad/partner/bloke on the street who is actually making the offer, not me!), on the proviso that the default is removed and the account marked as settled.

 

I know they've got sod all that they can use, but I'm just thinking that it might be worth a punt just to get this one sorted.

 

Or do you think that would just give them added vigour for being obstructive (by making them think I'm backing down)?

 

So, should I veto the first one and just send a short, to the point, accept this or leave me alone one, or should I carry on with the original one, sent to the top dog, and then maybe at a later date (like when it's ignored:rolleyes:) go with a shorter one? If I did this I'd need to take out the bit about not responding to them in the long letter, otherwise I'll look like a bit of a lemon.

 

Any thoughts anyone?

 

Lexis:)

[miss muppet]

Don't give up on this one Lexis, send them your excellent letter, you know what they say "never pay a blackmailer". Consumer Protection Regulations 2008 - quote from Susan Edwards, Head of Credit Investigations and Enforcement OFT;

 

Breach of Reg 5 of the CPRs is a criminal offence under Reg 9 and can also be enforced under part 8 of the Enterprise Act 2002. Under section 21A 0f the Enterprise Act where an application for an Enforcement Order is made the court may require the Respondent 'to provide evidence of the accuracy of any factual claim' (such a claim that a debtor has signed a credit agreement).

 

In addition it should be noted that threats to take action that cannot be taken is listed as one of the factors that wll be considered in assessing agressive practices in Regulation 7(2) of the CPRs.

[Andy01]

Hi Lexis

I am sorry to intervine but I am very new to this sit and read your threads dealing with BOS ans Blair's. I need help and guidence on my case. I have almost 10 cards which was taken back in 90's. I have cleared some of them by paying reduced payment for full and final settlement. But I still have 3 with BOS and Halifax but they are dealt by DCA Blair sScott and one of them with Robinson's. i have been paying them £1 a month since last 7 to 8yrs.

Lately all this media is going about CCact 74. I thought I may be lucky if I try. My agreements will be old and they might not find them at all cause they were all taken in around 1996-1998.

Do you think or any one please advice me to have a go at them . I think I have got nothing to loose or I carry on paying £1.

Its just a sence of relief that I ahve cleared all of them.

By the way you are a damn good writer!

[citizenB]

Andy S, you have nothing to lose by requesting sight of a copy of the agreement. Do you have your own thread started?. There is a beginners guide in my signature that will advise you how to do this.

 

There you can ask as many questions as you like and people will be able to offer advice on your particular situation.

 

Leixis,

 

Did you see this by another forum member

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2067255.html

 

PDF in post 95