Invalid Default Notices

[dadofholly]

Thanks for those comments. I had been informed that is was invalid - but just needed to understand how and why so i could use the info in my defence.

 

Thanks again.

[lexis200]

After 6 years all information regarding this alleged debt should be removed from your credit file. Sometimes you have to point this out to the CRA's if they have not already removed it.

 

Thanks for that:) Only 4 years to go then...

[Bigdebtor]

OH asked me a default question last night that foxed me...

 

What happens after the 6 years when a default has been placed on your file?

 

If you have an unenforceable agreement (so if all is correct they should not be able to take you to court), and your D has dropped off your file, what is left for a creditor to do?

 

They can't default you again on the same account, they can't take you to court; what happens to your credit file? Does it just go back to showing as x amount of missed payments??

 

Also the debt would be time barred after 6 years - so you need pay nothing more - and as already said the CRA must remove all data over 6 years old from your file. It's intended to let you have afresh start - there was a move to cut this to 3 years before Gordon Brown left No 10 - probably will never happen now?

[lexis200]

Thanks again for that.

 

Just to add a spanner into the works, some of the accounts are still being paid on a payment plan. Whilst I can see how the ones I'm not paying/acknowledging will be dropped, what would happen to the others?

 

I'm guessing they'll just keep showing as arrangements to pay?

[dadofholly]

Also the debt would be time barred after 6 years - so you need pay nothing more - and as already said the CRA must remove all data over 6 years old from your file. It's intended to let you have afresh start - there was a move to cut this to 3 years before Gordon Brown left No 10 - probably will never happen now?

 

Have you any idea who was behind this campaign? It may be worth trying to restart it.

 

There is a 10 minute rule bill in parliament today on banking reform. I am involved in monetary reform myself - trying to stop banks creating money out of thin air, as 97% of all money that exists today is only in electronic form and created by banks as loans.

 

Here is link

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2010/09/carswell-on-bank-reform.html

 

Sorry - I know its not part of the thread - just thought it may interest you as you mentioned the campaign to reduce CRA's time on information.

[Bigdebtor]

D

 

Sorry - can't even remember who told me about it now - but I think I did see something about it on CAG - you could search the forum - or search Google if no luck on CAG?

 

BD

[dadofholly]

D

 

Sorry - can't even remember who told me about it now - but I think I did see something about it on CAG - you could search the forum - or search Google if no luck on CAG?

BD

 

Thanks - will do. See if it is still live etc.

 

Here is better link on monetary reform and an end to debt slavery - other one is bit vague.

 

http://prosperityuk.com/

[lexis200]

I think this was mentioned on Vints default thread some time ago.

[Bigdebtor]

Lexis

 

Do you know what post no (or approx when?).

 

BD

[lexis200]

Sorry no, but this is the thread I think it may have been on. Even if it's not it's a good read:)

[Bigdebtor]

OK Thnaks anyway.

 

I've read through this whole thread in full once before and dipped in again many times. I'll try Vint's posts first and see if I get anywhere - but not tonight!

 

BD

[victoria_siempre]

Hi guys

 

Can I ask a practical point based on analyzing the enemy's intentions through his actions.

 

I have 2 very recent DNs, 1 from Natwest and 1 from Mercers (Barclaycard going back to mid 1990s - Ms, Goldfish can't remember)

 

The Natwest seems compliant but the Mercers one seems deliberately not so; wrong amount, no address of OC, no underlining embolding etc.

 

So my question is why?

 

Hope this makes sense

 

regards

 

vic

[Bigdebtor]

Easy - DCA = bunch of very stupid (but arrogant) people who are NEVER wrong.

I believe Mercers shouldn't be issuing the DN in any case as they are not the OC - just a DCA.

BD

[victoria_siempre]

I agree the sentiment BD

 

But Barclays say Mercers are acting as their agent to do this. And Mercers say the same. so their is no assignemnt of debt.

 

I understand that this is their tactics. But what is their purpose in issuing a deliberately dodgey DN that they might later have to explain in court?

 

 

vic

[Bigdebtor]

I just think they are stupid - plain and simple (very!).

 

I can't see them having a hidden agenda on this - but maybe others have come across this and know different?

 

BD

[dadofholly]

Hi Vic

 

You say initially that this Barclays debt goes back to the mid 90's

 

When was anything last paid on the account? -

Edited September 14, 2010 by dadofholly

[Bigdebtor]

Good point! I missed that. Possibly SB if no payments made in last 6 years?

 

BD

[victoria_siempre]

Hi guys

 

I have posts elsewhere re history of this. Last payments were June. All accounts were paid until I became redundant then.

 

I am currently dealing with 50k+ (most old but some new) in the current climate of recent court judgements.

 

That's why I'm taking this slowly and feeling my way with their tactics, all of which are very different.

 

Hence my question.

 

 

vic

[Bigdebtor]

remember there's a huge difference between card default charges - all reclaimable now - and bank overdraft charges - not yet.

 

BD

[lexis200]

I agree the sentiment BD

 

But Barclays say Mercers are acting as their agent to do this. And Mercers say the same. so their is no assignemnt of debt.

 

I understand that this is their tactics. But what is their purpose in issuing a deliberately dodgey DN that they might later have to explain in court?

 

My guess would be that sending out a letter with the heading Default Notice will bump some people into phoning them to get a payment in.

 

This is after all a DCA's reason for being - get the money in any way. It's simply a percentages game for them; you are on CAG so are aware it's not legal, but joe shmoe may see it and panic, thus phoning in to pay money they don't have.

 

 

vic

 

If the account is still held by barclays I can't see why mercers would be the ones issuing the dn anyway as it's not them that the payments would ultimately be owed to. Are you certain it's barclays who have replied to you, or have mercers simply told you this?

 

I know Cabot seemed to send out assignment letters on behalf of goldfish - same font, format, codes etc, but with goldfish's name heading it. Is it possible that this is what mercers are doing?

[diddydicky]

OH asked me a default question last night that foxed me...

 

What happens after the 6 years when a default has been placed on your file?

 

If you have an unenforceable agreement (so if all is correct they should not be able to take you to court), and your D has dropped off your file, what is left for a creditor to do?

 

They can't default you again on the same account, they can't take you to court; what happens to your credit file? Does it just go back to showing as x amount of missed payments??

 

when you default on the whole of the agreement- the recording of missed monthly payments will (should) stop so that all that the last entry will be the default- after six years this ceases to be seen on your file so that all trace of the matter is gone on the cra files

 

same with a ccj

[victoria_siempre]

Thanks lexis

 

Barclaycard wrote Aug 18 'payment due £36x.xx'.: "You must make your payment or we'll instruct Mercers Debt collections Ltd to send you a default notice in accordance with ...."

 

So Barclaycard have designated Mercers as their agents.

 

Mercers issued DN dated Aug 20 (both letters arrived in same post) 'amount due £54x.xx'.

 

I sent CCA to Barclaycard Aug 25; it has been received but no reply as yet.

 

Mercers wrote Sept 9 IMPORTANT NOTICE 'outstanding balance £9xx2.xx' "We will be instructing a local debt collector to visit you the above address to collect payment"

 

I am not bothered about DNs or visits.

 

As well as sending the 'account in dispute letter to Barclaycard' I want to send something like:

 

" Dear

I note your letter ref BBC2CL/1.3 dated August 18 informing me that you are instructing Mercers Debt Collections Ltd to act as your agents.

 

Since then I have received a number of curious telephone calls, all of which I have recorded, from your agents and a letter, all of which seem to breach Office of Fair Trading guidelines regarding debt collection given the context of my previous correspondence with yourselves. I should be grateful if you would or would not confirm that Mercers Debt Collections Ltd are indeed acting as your agents in their questionable conduct so as to assist me in making my reports fairly to the appropriate regulatory authorities.

 

If you do not reply to me within seven working days my report will concern both your and Mercers’ actions."

 

What do people think about this as a line of attack?

 

vic

[diddydicky]

Also the debt would be time barred after 6 years - so you need pay nothing more - and as already said the CRA must remove all data over 6 years old from your file. It's intended to let you have afresh start - there was a move to cut this to 3 years before Gordon Brown left No 10 - probably will never happen now?

 

it's three years in europe i belive- and so we will have to come into line

 

such a move though may be a double edged sword- since creditors are then likely to be far more litigation minded and at a much earlier stage- which means that they will inevitably tighten up their paperwork DN's etc to comply

[Bigdebtor]

DD Thanks for this - and a good point (as always) on the double edge bit.

 

Can you have a quick look at my query afew minutes ago on this very subject on Bobogosing's "Advice on an Egg Loan agreement" thread?

 

Thanks

 

BD

[diddydicky]

Hi All

 

Sorry to jump in - Can anyone have a quick look at a DN that i have uploaded to see if it is valid - and if not valid what makes it invalid.

 

This is part of a pending court case so all help will be greatly appreciated.

 

http://i638.photobucket.com/albums/uu110/dadofholly/DefaultPage1.jpg

 

http://i638.photobucket.com/albums/uu110/dadofholly/DefaultPage2.jpg

 

 

oh dear, the DN demands that you make payment in full (of what?- there are two figures mentioned?) to remedy the alleged default- even if the whole of the balance of the account is due as arrears- which is unlikely- it is unclear what amount they are demanding you pay.

 

s89 prescribes that the "status" quo" is resumed if you comply with the DN- however- if you have paid the whole of the balance of the account to remedy arrears and this includes sums that were not yet due under the agreement- then how can you- after remediing the DN- then continue to make payments of sums not yet due- if you already paid them!

 

in other words- the purpose and intent of the DN cannot be acheived.

 

furrther, the name and address of the creditor must appear on the DN as well as that of the debtor

 

the address on the DN is that of HFO services- the creditors agent- therefore if the creditor HFO's address is not the same as HFO services- then this is invalid too

 

The DN itself is an unlawful repudiation which i personally would elect to accept (in wiriting)