why you shouldnt use section 77/78 CCA 1974 if you want the signed agreement

[Muffintop]

charliebubs:Thanks PT - that is what I thought.

 

So many people on here seem to send the first letter, wait the 12+2+30 days and then stop paying. This seemed a little hasty to me!!

 

Thanks for your help

 

SD: I think this a very 'personal' issue and every individual needs to consider their own unique circumstances before deciding their strategy- there is no 'one size fits all' solution.

 

The fact remains that the statutory requests in the CCA 74 Act hold powerful consumer rights. Of course banks/dca's will try to dodge out of their responsibilites to respond to it, but it is still a bona fide legal instrument that holds a lot of sway in law and if a creditor does not respond adequately in the legally stipulated 12+2 days, then it is your right to put the account into dispute and if you wish, stop paying them until they come up with the goods, or very much more likely, don't.

 

This decision to stop paying though should be considered against the shape of your own PERSONAL debt situation, reliant on how old the accounts are, have you just been making token payments, what your personal circumstances are [are you a property owner? Do you have many assets?] etc so that you can gauge your own level of risk, because like it or not, unless you intend to pay off your creditors dutifully ad infinitum, everyone here has to be prepared to undertake a level of RISK.

 

The level of that risk has of course to be gauged by the individual and what their personal circumstances dictate as 'comfortable' for them. In my case, I largely have pre 2007 debts defaulted in 2000, paid off under token payment arrangements for years, from experience I have found a couple of accounts [one quite big] that I stopped paying haven't bothered to get in touch with me for three years, so immediately being hounded if you stop paying clearly isn't an automatic response from dca's.

 

In my case I don't have any income at the moment, the house is in my wife's name etc and personally I'm not adverse to taking a reasonable level of calculated risk, so I can afford to be bullish. But that's just me.

 

What this excellent thread gives you are the tools to further your investigations if you feel the need or indeed are forced to do so. Personally, I think if a dca/creditor can't come up with a reasonable version of a credit agreement when you first ask, in the vast majority of cases I reckon it is safe to assume it simply doesn't exist and the odds are loaded in your favour to stop paying- the statute barring clock has to start ticking sometime. I think most of the time it's worth just keeping it as simple as possible, and judging when it might be best to just quietly keep your head down, in the knowledge that in all liklihood, all your creditors can do is keep sending irritating but harmless letters.

 

Thankyou for this post... Im finding posts on this thread have thrown me into a real quandry, I have followed the 12 + 2 DAYs, no cca then default letter and stopped paying until they disclose the cca in the format it should be... why, because I wanted to see if they had it, call it the game if you like of poker... I had never missed a payment prior to that and had a squeeky clean credit rating.

Why did I take the risk then, well i thought that if i didnt pay them whilst account was in dispute it was ok because well the account was officially in dispute and this meant that if they provided my agreement signed sealed etc then I would just continue to pay them off and then sort out my credit file afterwards, after all they couldnt legally place a default on my file if the account was in dispute..

Now Im reading that this isnt necessarily the case and Im concerned you mention above if you have property as I also believed that they could not take out any charging orders (or rather the court could) unless they provided the signed agreement in correct format)????

The rule I was living by was.... if they dont have a copy of my signed agreement (pre 2007) agreements be it only 2005 and 2004 then they couldnt enforce the debt. Now Im dead confused and wondering if I should cave in and pay the last 3 months while I still have a chance of keeping some sort of credit rating.... Can someone pse pse clarify for me.

[Muffintop]

and bumping you night owls

[underdog13]

eesh. When I get hungry I make up words. Sorry....

 

 

 

 

Not good. Unless you need to lose a few pounds I suppose.

 

Go see a CAB and do a proper CFF. Talk through the options. If this is the case I can't see that any of your payments should be any more than token offers.

 

Have a stomach injury, so it's difficult to eat much anyway. Which in a weird sort of way helps, I suppose. Already lost £££s, now I'll be losing some lbs;)

 

CAB said they can't help because I'm not on benefits. Tried to set up my own DMP, but they don't want to know - won't accept my offers. They know I'm a home owner, so I guess the sharks have scented blood....

[underdog13]

underdog13: I see your point, but surely these technicalities are 'the law'? The law and the law alone should be all that judges are permitted to base their decisions on, not moral or personal view points - in an ideal world, anyway:rolleyes:

 

People have got away with murder on technical breaches, convictions have been found to be unsafe and overturned on technicalities. Ah, but of course, money is considered far more important than human life in our country isn't it?

 

SD; Very, very true, particularly in English Law where historically, crimes against property [eg fraud] can get you banged up for longer than crimes against a person [e.g. rape].

 

Anyway I don't see what this problem is with finding and exploiting 'technicalities' in the law to your advantage. The consumer is allowed the right to bona fide legal arrangements for their loans just like any other body such as a business and if the creditor is negligent in providing just that....then tough. I would not expect to see any bank shying away from expoliting such a situation if it benefited them for 'moral' reasons.

 

The law is the law and all judges must abide by it's letter. And our legal system is littered with endless cases of people getting away with things through 'technicalities'. Terrorists have done it, and recently one even claimed compensation from our government through a 'technicality' in the European Huam Rights law.

 

So I don't see why we as ordinary consumers, should feel guilty about being versed enough in the law that is relevant to us, and asserting our rights and using it where it is advantageous to us to do so, as and when we can. Nobody else seems to have this 'moral dilemma'. Why should we.

 

Completely agree, SD:) Being lectured by bankers/creds/DCAs on morals is akin to a thief complaining about being burgled; there's nothing more poisonous to them than a flippin' good dose of their own medicine.

Edited February 24, 2009 by underdog13
typo

[the_shadow]

and bumping you night owls

 

Hi Muffintop,

 

Just to be clear, the act states that for the court to enforce the debt all the prescribed terms and signature need to be on the document they place before the judge... not the copy they send you.. before the judge.

 

From what I can gather originally they were sending out the actual agreements after CCA requests and people could then tell whether all info was on them and proceed accordingly... yes the credit card firms would trash their records but after 6 years the debt/non repayment would disappear from their credit files and they could send out statute barred letters to anyone who came sniffing (the debt would still exist!) or if the creditor is feeling really generous I suppose it could actually write off the debt. In effect they do this and sell it onto the DCA's

 

Now theyre not sending out agreements (usually) so people cant tell until they get a letter informing them they are taking them to court if the creditor has an agreement they think will suffice in front of a judge or if not the debt just gets sold on to various DCA's to attempt to get satisfaction.

 

It appears some creditors have gone to court with less than a signed agreement and if the defendant doesnt know the relevant parts of the act to quote back to the judge "could" be liable to have the claim upheld. These should be appealable(Is that a word?)

 

To get a charging order against youre property they would first need to get a CCJ against you. So you would get a chance to quote to the judge the relevant parts of the act so long as you are sure they dont have a nice original copy with your signature on it.

 

PmW

[the_shadow]

CAB said they can't help because I'm not on benefits. Tried to set up my own DMP, but they don't want to know - won't accept my offers. They know I'm a home owner, so I guess the sharks have scented blood....

 

Any chance of moving the ownership of the house to a spouse/relative?

 

Its something I'm considering... only problem is I'd still be paying the mortgage so I think it means I hold an interest in the property and hence an asset?

 

I was too harsh earlier... its not all dogs I hate:-)

[underdog13]

Any chance of moving the ownership of the house to a spouse/relative?

 

Its something I'm considering... only problem is I'd still be paying the mortgage so I think it means I hold an interest in the property and hence an asset?

 

I was too harsh earlier... its not all dogs I hate:-)

Phew:D

 

That's a good idea about transfering the the ownership, but unfortunately I'm not in a position to do so.

[JGJ]

underdog13

 

An excellent quote by you. "Theres nothing more poisonous to them than a flippin good dose of their own medicine"

 

After having read through the excellent postings in this particular thread, I have been given once again, more weapons to attempt to inflict just as you quote,a flippin good dose of their own medicine.

 

I send special thanks to the more knowlegeable posters (we all know who they are) for the tireless research into their lawbooks etc. to give us the tools and Acts with which to in fact, at least attempt to give them a flippin good dose of their own medicine. :D

 

"EXEMPLO DUCEMUS"

[underdog13]

underdog13

 

An excellent quote by you. "Theres nothing more poisonous to them than a flippin good dose of their own medicine"

 

After having read through the excellent postings in this particular thread, I have been given once again, more weapons to attempt to inflict just as you quote,a flippin good dose of their own medicine.

 

I send special thanks to the more knowlegeable posters (we all know who they are) for the tireless research into their lawbooks etc. to give us the tools and Acts with which to in fact, at least attempt to give them a flippin good dose of their own medicine. :D

 

"EXEMPLO DUCEMUS"

 

Now hands up who wants to be nursey and administer it to them:D

[SkemDosser]

pmw1971: Any chance of moving the ownership of the house to a spouse/relative?

 

Its something I'm considering... only problem is I'd still be paying the mortgage so I think it means I hold an interest in the property and hence an asset?

 

I was too harsh earlier... its not all dogs I hate:-)

 

SD: At the risk of going off topic a bit, transfering ownership is a relatively straightforward business- I did it a while back myself purely from internet research and if from hanging around here you are already versed with reading consumer law, property law is no more difficult to grasp lol

 

Not wanting to be seen as denying any lawyers on here trade [sorry!] you can do a land transfer directly though the local land registry for about 50 GBP [varies according to property value] as opposed to 3-400 GBP through a solicitor. You have to be very legally precise on certain parts of the form but it's not rocket science and the Land Registry people are very helpful [big up for the Lytham office!]

 

Staying on the mortgage doesn't affect the overall ownership of the property; that is something between you and the mortgage company, who you may have to get permission from to undertake the process, but I had no problem and I understand other people 99% of the time don't.

 

So you can remain liable for the mortgage but have no interest in the property which of course by default, denies any scrabbling creditors from getting to it through you. It's a financial arrangement you find for example very many businessmen set up for themselves as a matter of course.

 

Of course though you have to be careful about the process because there are personal issues involved as well as financial which any good solicitor would advise you on. Your marriage/relationship may seem good at the mo' but if it nosedives, you might be stuffed lol

[the_shadow]

 

SD: At the risk of going off topic a bit, transfering ownership is a relatively straightforward business- I did it a while back myself purely from internet research and if from hanging around here you are already versed with reading consumer law, property law is no more difficult to grasp lol

 

Not wanting to be seen as denying any lawyers on here trade [sorry!] you can do a land transfer directly though the local land registry for about 50 GBP [varies according to property value] as opposed to 3-400 GBP through a solicitor. You have to be very legally precise on certain parts of the form but it's not rocket science and the Land Registry people are very helpful [big up for the Lytham office!]

 

Staying on the mortgage doesn't affect the overall ownership of the property; that is something between you and the mortgage company, who you may have to get permission from to undertake the process, but I had no problem and I understand other people 99% of the time don't.

 

So you can remain liable for the mortgage but have no interest in the property which of course by default, denies any scrabbling creditors from getting to it through you. It's a financial arrangement you find for example very many businessmen set up for themselves as a matter of course.

 

Of course though you have to be careful about the process because there are personal issues involved as well as financial which any good solicitor would advise you on. Your marriage/relationship may seem good at the mo' but if it nosedives, you might be stuffed lol

 

Thanks SD, very useful information

[SkemDosser]

Reading some of the recent posts I get the sense some people are feeling how I did a couple of months ago when this thread started- ohmigod everything I've learnt on this site so far has just been undermined lol

 

It has to be bore in mind though, as I see it, this thread is a well thought out and explained tool to help you get the information you want, if- or, as and when- you need it.

 

And I think the key word there is IF. The main 'danger' this thread holds [iMHO] is that it may be seen as devaluing the powers and effectiveness of the CCA request provisons of the CCA Act 74 , which may do disservice to many users here who really don't need much more than that to satisfy their own personal circumstances.

 

As I said in another post every one here has their own unique personal circumstances which require individual, specific strategies but let me use myself as an example.

 

In common with I reckon the vast majority of people who come to this site, I consider myself an ordinary man-in-the-street consumer, albeit now more empowered than I used to be by what I've found out about my rights in these great forums.

 

I am a can't payer rather than a won't payer; I hold no illusions about getting my debts wiped out nor am I out to work the system to get money back whether it be illegal charges or trying to achieve legal precedents etc. I simply want to relax in the knowledge that the raft of debts I hold are unenforceable, that I'm not likely to face any court action, and I can just get on with life.

 

I've been through all the default business in 2000 so they dissapeared from the CRA's in 2006 and as there is no likelihood I will ever be able to pay the debts back I want to be able to stop payments and get the statute bar clock ticking, with reasonable odds stacked behind me that I can't be persued legally for them.

 

Therefore my strategy is:

1] request CCA's as is your legal right under CCA Act 74;

2] after non-compliance [which invariably is the case] send a default notice, stop paying and get that clock running;

3] if you get a court notice [which from what I can tell here is less, rather than more, likely to happen to you], don't panic because the account is in dispute through the legal and proper mechanism of CCA 74 which you can present to court [if again, it ever gets that far] AND you are well armed now with the advice from people on this forum to put together a defence case that has a very substantial prospect of succeeding.

 

Part 3 of above is of course the one thing I would say every person on this site is trying avoid. It is why we are here. From what I can gather from pouring over this and other forums for a few months is that this only happens in a minority of cases, and primariy if:

1] the debt is relatively 'fresh;'

2] your creditors scents that you have some assets eg property that they might be able to get to.

 

If these factors are part of your personal circumstances, then the CPR 31.14 process may be worth pursuing. You'd have to weigh that up with the other argument that it might just as well be worth of running with the risk of letting sleeping dogs lie. Otherwise, as ordinary consumers, I still think we should keep things as simple as possible and not get too carried away [and worried about] processes that you don't presently need, when the CCA Act 74 gives you plenty of powers to give you peace of mind and a decent legal standing if things go 'nuclear.'

 

As always, each to his own of course and we all have different tolerance levels to risk, but thanks again to each and everyone of the contributors to this thread it's all very thought provoking.

Edited February 24, 2009 by SkemDosser
Typos, typos, typos!

[Muffintop]

pmw1971: Any chance of moving the ownership of the house to a spouse/relative?

 

Its something I'm considering... only problem is I'd still be paying the mortgage so I think it means I hold an interest in the property and hence an asset?

 

I was too harsh earlier... its not all dogs I hate:-)

 

SD: At the risk of going off topic a bit, transfering ownership is a relatively straightforward business- I did it a while back myself purely from internet research and if from hanging around here you are already versed with reading consumer law, property law is no more difficult to grasp lol

 

Not wanting to be seen as denying any lawyers on here trade [sorry!] you can do a land transfer directly though the local land registry for about 50 GBP [varies according to property value] as opposed to 3-400 GBP through a solicitor. You have to be very legally precise on certain parts of the form but it's not rocket science and the Land Registry people are very helpful [big up for the Lytham office!]

 

Staying on the mortgage doesn't affect the overall ownership of the property; that is something between you and the mortgage company, who you may have to get permission from to undertake the process, but I had no problem and I understand other people 99% of the time don't.

 

So you can remain liable for the mortgage but have no interest in the property which of course by default, denies any scrabbling creditors from getting to it through you. It's a financial arrangement you find for example very many businessmen set up for themselves as a matter of course.

 

Of course though you have to be careful about the process because there are personal issues involved as well as financial which any good solicitor would advise you on. Your marriage/relationship may seem good at the mo' but if it nosedives, you might be stuffed lol

 

woooo go back one or two posts. why are we discussing moving ownership of your property because of cpr requests??? I dont recall reading anything in the thread that your property could be at risk by asking for a pre court disclosure about the alledged consumer credit agreement held by them...... a credit card isnt a priority debt... and also I presume your talking again about charging orders which cant be placed on your property by anyone other than a judge... please correct me if I have got the wrong end of the stick.. I would only considering moving my half of the property over via land registry if I were to go bankrupt and even then you would have to do it well before you went bankrupt or it would show why you have done it, in a fraudulent way basically...

Edited February 24, 2009 by Muffintop
typo

[Muffintop]

Any chance of moving the ownership of the house to a spouse/relative?

 

Its something I'm considering... only problem is I'd still be paying the mortgage so I think it means I hold an interest in the property and hence an asset?

 

I was too harsh earlier... its not all dogs I hate:-)

Why cant you go through one of the debt charity organisations that dont charge anything to set up a dmp or iva? I understand if you have property the dmp is the better option

[the_shadow]

woooo go back one or two posts. why are we discussing moving ownership of your property because of cpr requests??? I dont recall reading anything in the thread that your property could be at risk by asking for a pre court disclosure about the alledged consumer credit agreement held by them...... a credit card isnt a priority debt... and also I presume your talking again about charging orders which cant be placed on your property by anyone other than a judge... please correct me if I have got the wrong end of the stick.. I would only considering moving my half of the property over via land registry if I were to go bankrupt and even then you would have to do it well before you went bankrupt or it would show why you have done it, in a fraudulent way basically...

 

Relax muffintop.. I just threw it in as its something I'm considering to make myself less attractive to DCA's/Creditors... as some of my debts are large (over 9k) I think if they see I'm a houseowner they may attempt to get a ccj and charging order.

[Red1983]

Relax muffintop.. I just threw it in as its something I'm considering to make myself less attractive to DCA's/Creditors... as some of my debts are large (over 9k) I think if they see I'm a houseowner they may attempt to get a ccj and charging order.

 

 

Hi there, sorry to but in.. but I thought that id share with you that in 2006 A&L put a CCJ on us, and then 8 months later tried to get a charging order. The Judge was quite frankly not impressed with A & L. The creditor tried to say we had missed a 20.00 payment, I had bank statements to prove otherwise:D. I personally beleive, that if a Judge can see that you have at least tried everything in your power to be amicable with them the creditor, and they are doing this, I do defiantely think a Judge sees this as unfair, crying helps too:D (real tears though, I was terrified, as I knew nothing of CAG at that time, but it wasn't as bad as I thought. I thought I would be in a huge court room, with men with funny hair.... it turns out it was just an office..LOL)

 

Red

xxxx

[Kraken1]

there is a lesson there - show you are being reasonable and sell yourself to the judge. Get him on your side.

 

This can be hard though....

[Red1983]

there is a lesson there - show you are being reasonable and sell yourself to the judge. Get him on your side.

 

This can be hard though....

 

 

..I imagine it is hard, afterwards I thought the judge was showing us favor, but I didn't try to get this, I was just honest. The minute I knew were going to be in difficulty, something inside me just knew to tell em straight away and offer what we could afford, I knew nothing at the time of all legislations and all that. I guess if I had been wiser I had asked for the CCA to start with.... never mind, we got a CCJ, but I haven't lost my home, so Im thankful for that, and with having little kiddies, I need to make sure I can keep a roof over their heads. I will be fighting A&L soon though for a CCA and charges and PPI, as I clearly remember and have it documented that both occasions in court, the judge would not let us pay the costs, but when I got a statement, a shody one at that, just out of the blue, never having one since the CCJ, it shows that A & L have put both sets of court costs on to the loan?!!?!? I mean whats up with that!!! I specifically remember the Judge saying "for the tape, no costs will be rewarded to A & L" and I have it writting from the summary letter recieved after court.

[bazaar]

Ooooh Red, that'll do nicely when you put a claim in against them, PPI, unlawful charges , Oh and by the way mr(s) Judge, do you remember when you told them specifically 'No Costs' , well just look what they did in showing contept to you judgey ( Flutter your eyelids at this point:D)

[Red1983]

Ooooh Red, that'll do nicely when you put a claim in against them, PPI, unlawful charges , Oh and by the way mr(s) Judge, do you remember when you told them specifically 'No Costs' , well just look what they did in showing contept to you judgey ( Flutter your eyelids at this point:D)

 

 

my point exactly, this is the only creditor at the mo I feel confident about, because any claims I make will not purely depend on the CCA nightmare! and its for the most money so YAY! well this is what I am thinking, I could be wrong, ...... um... I have been in the past...... anyways, YAY.

[Red1983]

I dont mean to deter anyone from this thread, but I was wondering if someone could just take a look at this thread I posted today http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/185958-capital-one-cpr-31-a.html, I really need to get this letter out and I really need someones valid opinion on it........ pretty please...... any hleps would be muchly appreciated.

 

Thank you so much

 

Red

[enamae]

Dear Sirs

 

Account number

 

I write with regards to the above account with your organisation.

 

I respectfully request that you provide me by return a copy of the credit agreement which bears my signature. I require this as i have reason to believe that there may be discrepancies within the agreement which may leave it improperly executed.Additionally i require the underwriting sheet or other document showing any commissions paid to you by the broker or by you to the broker

 

(If you have any other reasons why you need the agreement such as misselling of PPI Add it here)

 

obviously if the agreement is improperly executed i would be entitled to ask the court to consider the agreement and make a declaration of the rights of parties to the agreement.

 

I must stress this request is NOT made pursuant to section 78 Consumer Credit Act 1974 but is made pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules ( Pre action protocols and Part 31.16) and therefore unsigned copy will not suffice, only a copy of the original contract in its unaltered form will suffice in these circumstances

 

Please confirm if you still hold a copy of my signed agreement and that you will provide me with this document.

 

I do not view this as an unreasonable request given that by supplying the document which i have asked for it will allow me to assess if my case has merit and will help to resolve matters possibly without the need to involve the court and will undoubtedly save costs on both sides

 

I look forward to your reply and wouyld ask for a response by 4pm on XXXX Date ( Give 21 days to respond)

 

Regards

 

 

 

 

you really must give the lender a reasonable amount of time to reply

 

 

Slightly confused second paragraph asks for a copy of the signed credit agreement by return, yet at the end of letter it states to give them 21 days. Has this been altered further along in the thread?

[SkemDosser]

Muffintop; woooo go back one or two posts. why are we discussing moving ownership of your property because of cpr requests??? I dont recall reading anything in the thread that your property could be at risk by asking for a pre court disclosure about the alledged consumer credit agreement held by them...... a credit card isnt a priority debt... and also I presume your talking again about charging orders which cant be placed on your property by anyone other than a judge... please correct me if I have got the wrong end of the stick.. I would only considering moving my half of the property over via land registry if I were to go bankrupt and even then you would have to do it well before you went bankrupt or it would show why you have done it, in a fraudulent way basically...

 

SD: hi Muffintop, went a bit off topic there and wasn't at all suggesting you need to do a property transfer in relation to cpr requests lol

 

It is an important issue though and depending on your own personal circumstances needs to be considered carefully if things look like they may get sticky along the line, which I think in the vast majority of our cases here is unlikely, but you never know.

 

It seems unfortunately in this present economic climate which is going to get worse before it gets better, creditors are scrambling to find ways of 'legitimately' recouping as much liquid cash as they can, and what's the soft option? Why finding a way to get at ordinary people's property and personal assets of course, which means finding a way to get a CCJ on a likely target [eg a property owner]then hope for a charging order if they can then find a way to say the debtor has defaulted on that judgement.

 

It seems a relative rarity at the moment but I've got a hunch we'll see more action like it. Of course it's a complex situation- it's a fair argument that with falling house prices the banks/dca's have missed the 'equity window' but they are increasingly desparate so for all the DMPs in the world I think they're going to try it on more and more on those debtors who they sense may have some assets.

 

If anybody thinks they might be one of them, then the tools outlined in this thread may well be worth using because to be forewarned is to be prepared

[SkemDosser]

pmw1971: Relax muffintop.. I just threw it in as its something I'm considering to make myself less attractive to DCA's/Creditors... as some of my debts are large (over 9k) I think if they see I'm a houseowner they may attempt to get a ccj and charging order.

 

SD: Hi pmw it is unfortunately, increasingly these days something I think people need to give serious, level headed thought to, but it has be VERY carefully worked out before acting on.

 

I've just replied to muffintop and mentioned that if you do have assets creditors can get to them as you said through the back door [i.e. CCJ then default chasing] and they're increasingly trying it on, and the CP31.14 route explained here may just be the perfect tool for you to use to strengthen your position if that's your situation.

 

Once again as my mantra goes, it's always down to your own, unique personal circumstances as to how you devise a strategy to deal with your debt problem. I transfered my property interests when I got into trouble and call it honour or whatever, I saw no reason why innocent parties in that property ownership should be penalised by charging orders/bankrupcy etc. because of me if things went tits up.

 

As it was out of my dozen odd debts I was CCJ'd for two of the small ones which I've dutifully paid, had arrangements on some of the others and ignored a couple which I haven't heard from since. So the doomsday scenario of having charging orders loaded left right and centre onto me and statutory demands never happened although I have been able to sleep well for years which made it worth it. Also, if say you are transfering to your wife, if you are canny enough there are many mechanisms in wills etc to protect your residency/inheritance rights etc without allowing creditors to get their grubby hands on your property the thought of which really sticks in my craw. After taking all of the interest off your debt when it was active, writing it off for tax when you are defaulted, selling it to a DCA for pennies then STILL trying for more money through turning an unsecured debt into a secured one?

 

They are all unspeakable B*****DS and I am as determined as I was then not to let them get a single penny more out of me if I can legitimately stop them from doing so.

Edited February 25, 2009 by SkemDosser
as usual, typos lol

[sequest]

Anybody got any thoughts on this please:

 

I sent CCA and SAR request to my bank some months ago and they finally replied that they had misfiled agreement. While endeavouring to arrange payment plan with them, they initiated court proceedings, via their solicitors.

Their POC was vague (only mentioned outstanding amounts), so I wrote to solicitors requesting agreements, etc on which they were basing their case.

Today got phonecall from their solicitors asking me for £1, so they could get the information from their client!! Isn't there something wrong here - am I supposed to help the claimants build their case?