Question re my Experian Credit Report

[airtomoreira]

The Cast:

 

1) Joe Public - a hard working, honest individual, whose financial circumstances took a turn for the worse several years back.

 

2) Pig E Bank Plc - a supposedly reputable High St Bank

 

3) Acme Collections - a company working for Pig E Bank Plc to recover debts that are not being satisfactorily serviced.

 

4) Shyster & Co - Solicitors acting on behalf of Pig E Bank Plc. On the face of it a highly reputable international law firm, their dark secret is that they hound individuals mercilessly in their alter ego of a DCA

 

The story so far:

 

a) Joe took out a Credit Card (allegedly!) with Pig E Bank around 2000

 

b) Joe fell on hard times around 2002 - 3. At this point, he agreed to pay a fixed monthly sum in repayment of his debt to Acme Collections, who had been instructed by Pig E Bank to chase up the debt

 

c) 2003 - Oct 2008. Nothing happened. Joe continued to pay every month, and was not approached by Pig e Bank or Acme to ask for more money.

 

d) Oct 2008. Shyster & Co write to Joe out of the blue, demanding that the debt be paid in full. They are pulling no punches.

 

e) Under advice, Joe sends a CCA Letter to Shyster & Co, asking for a true copy of the original agreement. He has received no reply, although the 12+2 day period has not yet expired

 

INTERVAL

 

My question is.....has Joe CCA'd the right people. Should he also CCA Acme Collections and / or Pig E Bank. Can Shyster & Co ignore his CCA letter on the grounds that he has written to the wrong people, even though they are the ones that are threatening to take legal action.

[hillards]

The CCA should go to the company making the demands for payment. They are saying 'cough up or else' you are saying 'prove that I owe you anything'. Do they have anything to back up their claim?

It's like being mugged and asking the mugger to hold on while you clear it with the bank that they can take your money, legally. You wouldn't do that - if the mugger can't prove you have to give them money then that is illegal.

If Shyster ignore the CCA then follow up with the next step, there are lots of copies of that letter in other threads which basically says that they have failed in their legal obligation and to 'go away'. You will have done your bit to tell them where they stand and this would be most useful if the case was ever taken in front of a judge - and we all know how many that it!

? in e) you say 'has not yet expired' - it either has, and you're telling them to go away, or it had, and you're enforcing your rights.

[airtomoreira]

Thanks for that Hillards, it confirms my own thoughts....but, to be crystal clear here, you said in your reply that "The CCA should go to the company making the demands for payment. They are saying 'cough up or else' you are saying 'prove that I owe you anything'. Do they have anything to back up their claim?"

 

In the example given, Joe doesn't owe Shyster & Co anything, does he, if they are only acting as solicitors for Pig E Bank. He would only owe them if Shyster had bought the debt off Pig E Bank. Does this make a difference?

[airtomoreira]

Anyone else got any ideas on the above scenario?

[silvermick]

Anyone else got any ideas on the above scenario?

 

This may help, hope so

 

I am going through a similar thing with CABOT, they wrote in 2007 quoting an account they had purchased from CitiFinancial, as I have no account with Citi I wrote and asked for a copy of the original agreement, they said that they would send off for it from Citi and could take up to 8 weeks...

 

Over a year later, 6th November 2008 I receivd a letter stating that they were sorry that they could not suply me with the agreement and they would accept a reduced sum in full and final settlement.

 

If there is no agreement then there is nothing owed to them, would you knock on a persons door and ask for monies that they do not owe you.

 

See what is in the letter you get back from them and take it from there, if they say they do not have or cannot get a copy of original agreement then tell them to go away or do not reply and consider seeing a solicitor.

 

Hapy days will come

 

Regards SM

[airtomoreira]

I'm getting lots of useful info, but no-one is answering the basic question that I would like the answer to (possibly because I'm not asking it correctly....so I'll have another go!!)

 

If I receive letters from a solicitor who is acting on behalf of their client (a Bank) - i.e. has not bought the debt off the Bank, who do I CCA? Is it the solicitor, or the Bank, or both?

 

I have already CCA'd the solicitor, as it seemed the obvious thing to do, seeing as how it's them who is saying "pay up or else", and it's them who would instigate legal action (on behalf of their client), but I'm also hearing the argument that I should CCA the Bank. If someone could give me a concise answer to this, it would be great!

 

Many thanks

[rory32]

If I receive letters from a solicitor who is acting on behalf of their client (a Bank) - i.e. has not bought the debt off the Bank, who do I CCA? Is it the solicitor, or the Bank, or both?

 

The solicitor. The reason for this is it keeps the solicitor in the loop so they can not later deny knowledge of your request and under s175 of the Act they have a duty to pass your request onto their client. There is no need to send a second CCA request to the bank.

[version302003]

The solicitor. The reason for this is it keeps the solicitor in the loop so they can not later deny knowledge of your request and under s175 of the Act they have a duty to pass your request onto their client. There is no need to send a second CCA request to the bank.

 

But CCAing them both will not hurt your defence esp. if the solicitor sends it back to the bank and they send it onto another. And once the bank have a cca request then as the owner/original creditor they cannot pass it on to no one else with out it and whilst it is disputed.

[airtomoreira]

Many many thanks to Rory32 for his excellent and concise information. Consider yourself in line for some serious scale tipping!

 

Thanks also to version 302003, as you say, I don't see how this can do any harm....although if under s.175 the solicitor has a duty to pass on the request to the client, why draw the Bank's attention to it twice (the second letter might land on the desk of someone who DOES know where the original agreement is!)

[hillards]

I did quite a write up on how the DCA process works, who is acting for who and how the truth sometimes gets distorted - a DCA will say they are acting for a client, when they have actually bought an account and the original creditor has written it off. It just sounds good when they write to you, but their 'client' is no longer in the loop.

 

You can read that by clicking Essential Read: How do the DCA's operate? in my signature area.

 

I started by saying to CCA the company making the demands, as they think they hold the account. If it is a solicitor acting for a bank then this could even be the in-house system, not a DCA as such. Halifax/HBOS send letters galore under the name 'Blair Oliver and Scott' for example.

 

Until you get a response to your CCA request we can only guess what the next scene will contain.

[airtomoreira]

s.175 of the CCA refers to a "simple assignment" can anyone explain the definition of a simple assignment, and how it differs from any other type of assignment? Thanks.

[rory32]

s.175 of the CCA refers to a "simple assignment"

No it doesn't. There is no mention of assignment in s175. s175 deals with receiving notices or payments as an agent of the creditor.

 

can anyone explain the definition of a simple assignment, and how it differs from any other type of assignment?

There are several different types of assignment. A simple assignment would merely mean that they are acting as an agent of the creditor which is the reason for the reference to s175.

[airtomoreira]

Thanks Rory, I stand corrected, but you have answered my question! Many thanks.

[airtomoreira]

Just plucked up the courage to have a peek at all the adverse information recorded against my name regarding (alleged) debts.

 

I'm puzzled as to why there is no adverse info at all from The Co-operative Bank, Halifax or Barclaycard, all of whom would (allegedly) have cause to be dissatisfied with the way that my relationship with them deteriorated (allegedly).

 

Is there any reason why a Bank would not record defaults etc against a person's name? I'm curious.

[Barclaydaav]

Well interestingly BarclayCard issued a default against me in Feb 2003 and it is listed on my Equafax report. But it does not appear on my experian report.

 

As for the barclaycard account in question. It is now statute barred and I have not heard anything about this since late 2002. I cannot even recall getting the default notice.

[cerberusalert]

Not all CRAs hold the same information, so it's worthwhile getting reports from the three main ones.

[Rayne]

oh ur having a laff!!! surely that a breach of DPA?

[airtomoreira]

Sorry, don't understand the last message?

[cerberusalert]

oh ur having a laff!!! surely that a breach of Data Protection Act?

 

Who is & how is it?