Fingers Vs Barclaycard

[Bigdebtor]

Hey All

 

In the meantime guys what is everyones / anybodys experienc of negotiating full and final settlements with credit card companies.

Situation is:

-have a hell of a lot of debt

-been paying all cards to date robbing peter to pay paul

-credit file fine

-due to change in circumstances income is now much less than outgoings so will start defaulting in due course

-negativity on my credit file will probably lead to losing my current job as work in financial services

 

so i cannot make arrangements with creditors as will show up negatively on my file etc

 

spoke to virgin who offered a full and final settlement on a £23k card of 95% with no adverse marks on my file

 

is there anyway to get card companies to accept less than this?

 

my parents may lend me some cash to repay some debts but have asked me to see if i can negotiate some settlements

 

any advice / tips?

 

Fingers

 

Fingers

 

I think the fact you need a squeeky clean rating with the CRA's limits your options regarding negotiating short settlement F&F's. I think even agreeing frozen interest and affordable monthly payments through CCCS would hurt your credit rating - but then so would any build up of arrears or issue of any DN.

 

I note the 95% virgin deal - not that good at all - I have found most OC's and DCA's move to 75% (ie. 25% discount) pretty readily - but not sure if this would leave your credit rating clean as I never have accepted such a low (25%) discount.

 

My advice would be:

 

1. Ensure you reduce your current (loan or credit card) balances as much as possible by reclaiming all unfair charges and associated contractual interest - this can mount up colossally over several years if around 2% per month or more compounded monthly. The Bank's SC victory last November did not affect your right to reclaim credit card charges in full.

2. Either do a SAR letter (£10) or CCA request (£1) to each OC to confirm if they actually have enforceable agreements - but even if they don't then they are still at liberty to report any non payments or disputed accounts to the CRA's - only a court enforcement is not possible with out an enforceable signed original cca.

3. If you think the CCA's are unenforceable then try to negotiate decent short settlements (certainly under 50%) - but only on condition they agree not to screw up your credit rating. However I have found I get the best deals (65% - 75% REDUCTIONS) when they get worried through my not paying them ANYTHING and claiming the ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE. MY credit rating is already stuffed but I no longer care. I just want to get the remaining creditors off my back - but not at any price.

4. Absolutely confirm that the impaired credit rating resulting from any of the above initiatives WILL definitely affect your employemnt. If it does, then I think you're pretty well snookered. If it doesn't then you've got lots of weapons at your disposal.

 

Does anyone else have any better suggestions based on Finger's CRA worries?

 

Sorry I can't provide any more positive advice in these circumstances.

 

Best of luck anyway - thanks for the pm - hope this has answered it as well as I can and that others may be able to help more too.

 

BD

Edited May 30, 2010 by Bigdebtor

[Fingers60]

Fingers

 

I think the fact you need a squeeky clean rating with the CRA's limits your options regarding negotiating short settlement F&F's. I think even agreeing frozen interest and affordable monthly payments through CCCS would hurt your credit rating - but then so would any build up of arrears or issue of any DN.

 

I note the 95% virgin deal - not that good at all - I have found most OC's and DCA's move to 75% (ie. 25% discount) pretty readily - but not sure if this would leave your credit rating clean as I never have accepted such a low (25%) discount.

 

My advice would be:

 

1. Ensure you reduce your current (loan or credit card) balances as much as possible by reclaiming all unfair charges and associated contractual interest - this can mount up colossally over several years if around 2% per month or more compounded monthly. The Bank's SC victory last November did not affect your right to reclaim credit card charges in full.

2. Either do a SAR letter (£10) or CCA request (£1) to each OC to confirm if they actually have enforceable agreements - but even if they don't then they are still at liberty to report any non payments or disputed accounts to the CRA's - only a court enforcement is not possible with out an enforceable signed original cca.

3. If you think the CCA's are unenforceable then try to negotiate decent short settlements (certainly under 50%) - but only on condition they agree not to screw up your credit rating. However I have found I get the best deals (65% - 75% REDUCTIONS) when they get worried through my not paying them ANYTHING and claiming the ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE. MY credit rating is already stuffed but I no longer care. I just want to get the remaining creditors off my back - but not at any price.

4. Absolutely confirm that the impaired credit rating resulting from any of the above initiatives WILL definitely affect your employemnt. If it does, then I think you're pretty well snookered. If it doesn't then you've got lots of weapons at your disposal.

 

Does anyone else have any better suggestions based on Finger's CRA worries?

 

Sorry I can't provide any more positive advice in these circumstances.

 

Best of luck anyway - thanks for the pm - hope this has answered it as well as I can and that others may be able to help more too.

 

BD

 

Thanks BD really appreciate your comments.

 

Will let you know how i get on.

 

Rgds

 

F

[Bigdebtor]

You're welcome Fingers.

 

Yes please - keep us posted - as winning any decent reduction without affecting your credit rating would be interesting feedback.

 

BD

[Fingers60]

i think the test case was this week 21st july that effects my cpr31.16 app...so going to try and find out the result

F

[Fingers60]

ok so here's the appeal case i was waiting for Kneale v Barclays Bank Plc (t/a Barclaycard) [2010] EWHC 1900 (Comm) (23 July 2010)

 

so i guess the question is have i got enough evidence, I have all my approachs under section 78 and all the t & cs that were sent to me by barclays...they have not sent me a copy of original or reconstructed copy ...then my 2 written requests under section 31.16......looking at comments on PTs thread there is some suggestion that the claimant did not have enough evidence to justify his claim for disclosure under 31.16...so the question is ....have i done enough ..do i have enough evidence ? and what is the impact of this appeal case...??

 

is it simply a case of this succesful appeal case by barclays blocks anyone trying to obtain disclosure for their original agreement under 31.16??

 

what are you thoughts?? shadow???

 

best

 

Fingers

[the_shadow]

Hi Fingers,

 

Read the judgement last night... yet another nail in the debtors coffin

 

TBH Barclays will push this as far as they can now they have a precident.. they will bully and threaten anyone who wishes to make the same kind of application BUT............

 

The judge did state a couple of nice points, one being that all cases are to be dealt with on their merits... (So make sure you have many )

 

Where the judge wants evidence I read that as being not only the attempts to get the information but also a good enough reason why...

 

eg. ..You think the prescibed terms on the original was wrong and the reconstructed copy or s78 response doesnt show this..

 

or .. You are sure you didnt tick the PPI box and yet you have been paying it all this time, the reconstructed copy or s78 copy doesnt contain a tickbox and the bank refuse to let you see the original to check for a tick.

 

or.. the copy / reconstructed copy they have sent you has the prescribed terms but you are sure yours didnt and want to confirm this..

 

These sort of reasons..but and its a big BUT you need to ensure your not sounding like going on a fishing exercise... basically read through the judgement and then read through it again looking at your evidence to ensure you dont fall into any of the pitfalls

 

I have to be honest and say I wouldnt take it any further now, I would seek their consent to vacate the hearing. As has been mentioned many times on here its better to be taken to court than to attempt to take them to court They have deeper pockets.

 

S.

[slick132]

If I can add to this.........

 

It may be wise to await comment from Pt as regards whether this successful Appeal by Barclays (BC) affects the possible continued use of CPR31.16.

 

Given the outcome of the case of Carey v HSBC, we have to consider whether it is advisable to take the bank to court seeking a ruling of unenforceability.

 

To defend a case where the original credit agreement is flawed or missing is still feasible and reasonable.

 

But to issue proceedings and take the defendant bank to court may be unwise.

 

I'll see if Pt has commented on this elsewhere.

 

[slick132]

Ahaa,

 

I now see PT has already commented about the case in the CPR31.16 thread - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/173201-why-you-shouldnt-use-100.html#post3053001

 

I'll read through myself and comment further if nec'y........

[Fingers60]

Thanks alot guys appreciate your replies.

 

Yes I agree about defending etc but im paying minimum payments on my card and cant afford for my credit history to affected.

So looks like it will be quite tough to get hold a of a copy of my credit agreement.

 

I have been working with a law firm on this and waiting for their reponse to the judgement in combination with my specific case.

 

When i get their reponse I will post up their advice both here and on PTs thread for others to view.

 

Kind regards

 

Fingers

[Fingers60]

Heres what my lawyers had to say on the matter:

 

"I have seen the appeal decision and I'm afraid it's not good news for your case. My initial response is that you should discontinue with your application as it is not going to be successful and it is highly likely that you will be ordered to pay Barclays costs. In any event, unfortunately we cannot act for you in this matter any further."

Doh !

So looks like Barclays have won, they wont send me the credit agreement as a result of requests under section 78, cpr 31.16 has now been blocked...crazy really!

My lawyers I doubt will take it forward now as its just not an easy case from their point of view

F

[the_shadow]

Heres what my lawyers had to say on the matter:

 

"I have seen the appeal decision and I'm afraid it's not good news for your case. My initial response is that you should discontinue with your application as it is not going to be successful and it is highly likely that you will be ordered to pay Barclays costs. In any event, unfortunately we cannot act for you in this matter any further."

 

Doh !

 

So looks like Barclays have won, they wont send me the credit agreement as a result of requests under section 78, cpr 31.16 has now been blocked...crazy really!

 

My lawyers I doubt will take it forward now as its just not an easy case from their point of view

 

F

 

Yep no suprise really. Personally I'd now look for an exit out of the case with the consent of Barclays... as you are still paying them they may not seek costs against you for up to now.

 

I think the recent test cases have shown that the consumer needs to know his place in court... and thats acting as a defendant only

 

S.

[slick132]

I agree, unless you want to take it forward yourself and make a better case than Kneale (who apparently was not well prepared).

 

You should communicate with Barclays (maybe email if you have a current contact for them) and say you may consider discontinuing your Application if Barclays agree not to seek costs.

 

See how they respond.

 

[Mandering]

Sternlight v Barclays Bank Plc [2010] EWHC 1865 (QB) (22 July 2010)

 

It really is game over for the consumer as claimant.

[Mandering]

This one is even more depressing...

 

Black Horse Ltd v Speak & Anor [2010] EWHC 1866 (QB) (21 July 2010)

[Fingers60]

Good evening chaps

 

Its been a sick sick day.

 

Firstly Slater vs egg .....

 

2nd, BC are coming after me for costs following my request to withdraw my 31.16 app for disclosure and both sides meet their own legal costs which they will not agree to.....

 

i cant even state the amount they want in costs..i will be sick ...all i wanted was my credit agreement...

 

but i guess the question is what would you think is a reasonable amount of costs from their side? my case was stayed pending outcome of Kneale etc

 

answers on a postcard !!!

[the_shadow]

Eeek I was afraid of this

 

Ok, in reality they should only be able to claim the actual costs involved in YOUR case... If they have given a massive costs amount I would add for a breakdown of those costs. I would look out for them attempting to charge for a barristers opinion when that would have been used in the main test case and not just for your proposed hearing. Also there is usually a limit on the amount of costs they can ask for in a fast track case but as yours is not on a track at the moment I'm not certain if there is a cap.

 

Has there been any hearings or has this been totally done via letter so far?

 

S.

[the_shadow]

If you think the amount is unjust or too much you could apply for the judge to determine the costs, always a risk tho.

 

Hopefully more legal minded suggestions will come along.

 

S.

[Fingers60]

Eeek I was afraid of this

 

Ok, in reality they should only be able to claim the actual costs involved in YOUR case... If they have given a massive costs amount I would add for a breakdown of those costs. I would look out for them attempting to charge for a barristers opinion when that would have been used in the main test case and not just for your proposed hearing. Also there is usually a limit on the amount of costs they can ask for in a fast track case but as yours is not on a track at the moment I'm not certain if there is a cap.

 

Has there been any hearings or has this been totally done via letter so far?

 

S.

 

EEK INDEED!!

 

thanks for responding

 

no hearings , done by letter so far

 

we know that Lovells were already working on the case for barclays as i have a copy of skeleton arguments another cagger forwarded to me,but not sure that counts for much

 

yes asked for breakdown of costs

 

i feel sick !

[Fingers60]

If you think the amount is unjust or too much you could apply for the judge to determine the costs, always a risk tho.

 

Hopefully more legal minded suggestions will come along.

 

S.

 

yes thx..will look at their costs when they come in and report back

[the_shadow]

Hmm if its all been done by letters and no hearings so far then it sounds suspicious to be too high. Its the actual hearings and preparing the docs for the hearing thats supposed to be the costly bit.

 

I do wonder if they are trying it on a bit... only the breakdown will give you a clue.

 

S.

[slick132]

Hi Fingers,

 

I've asked the site team for any input they may have about this and will report back.

 

This is Barclays' way of putting folks off litigating against them.

[the_shadow]

Hi Fingers, any luck?

 

S.

[Roger_Ahoy]

Hi Fingers

wondered if the scary costs was approx £1800 including vat? and possibly a standard letter? If so I'll pm you my exact figure.

 

I'm told their costs should be £500 to £700 tops. Also , look at this question of "necessity" which is a key part of the critical judgment in kneale. Would Mr Justice Flaux Have been so critical in your case ?

 

R

[RoadToRecovery]

This one is even more depressing...

 

Black Horse Ltd v Speak & Anor [2010] EWHC 1866 (QB) (21 July 2010)

 

This one is surely the judge believing the verbal evidence of a bank employee over that of the defendant?

[slick132]

Hi Fingers,

 

Just to confirm the Site Team are aware and I'll come back with anything useful to you.