Invalid Default Notices

[Bigdebtor]

I found them a bit chewy - but we'd better get back on topic before we get another row!

 

BD

[patrickq1]

i have written to experian this is the reply about default removal ?

 

I would ask that you clarify the exact basis of your dispute with HFO and the action you have so far taken in this regard.

 

We have previously queried the accuracy of this data with HFO. They have responded and stated:

 

"Please advise the customer that this account is currently being dealt with by the complaints manager Miss DiDi Nellie . Please advise the customer to contact Miss Nelson on: 0203 024 9687. In the meantime the default must remain."

 

The correspondence you have sent refers to the, now withdrawn, OFT test case regarding charges applied to current accounts. The entry you have highlighted relates to a credit card account.

 

The Office of Fair Trading previously investigated the issue of charges applied to credit card accounts and they published their results in April 2006.

 

Kind regards

 

Mr Lee Hancock

Customer Relations Executive

 

Customer Support Centre

Experian Interactive

[patrickq1]

The correspondence you have sent refers to the, now withdrawn, OFT test case regarding charges applied to current accounts. The entry you have highlighted relates to a credit card account.

my account is about a credit card and not a current account ?

[emandcole]

Ignorance or apathy? Perhaps a touch of both!

[patrickq1]

patrick, i am not against you- i am trying to point you to then difficulties you may face

 

my passport says it has been issued by the crown and i am a lawful british subject and gives me vital overseas protections

 

but it ASSUMES that the details contained about me are accurate and not a forgery or mis- represented- and if they are - then the protection offered by the passport to the bearer may well not apply

 

your agreement may well be headed as regulated by the consumer credit act but this issue will (may) arise where you are challenged that contrary to the regulations - you used part of the loan made to you under that agreement for business purposes and that as such funds issued for that purpose do not come under the CCA.

then it should under the law be considered a void agreement i have been asked to enter into an agreement that is completely false in material means and cannot be considered valid

[enslaved]

would it not then be a multi-part agreement falling within section 18,

and as such have seperate T&C's for the regulated part and the unregulated part.

If not the agreement would be unenforceable s60?,(sorry cannot remember) s127.

[diddydicky]

[/color][/b]

then it should under the law be considered a void agreement i have been asked to enter into an agreement that is completely false in material means and cannot be considered valid

 

no, if your earlier comments are correct it would appear that you applied for the loan for business purposes then gave the pretence, in order to overcome the difficulty of getting it as a business loan- that it was for personal use

[patrickq1]

unfortunitly no they had me sign the deed as a personal loan but it was only 25000

the actual loan was 20,000

if the Bank would not allow a Loan to a limited company then it must be a regulated loan under the agreement terms....It cannot be both ways and it cannot be seen to support an unregulated agreement with the essence of the headings on the agreement saying THIS AGREEMENT IS REGULATED ,how can it differ and why should it differ regardless of how the money was used...The cannot tell you black really means white ? i think you have really stretched the bounds of your imagination DD ,i do understand what you are saying but the logic behind it i dont comprehend if a document states this is a REGULATED AGREEMENT you cannot shift it from one to another i shall post the agreement in my other thread and from their you can disect it bit by bit lol not having a go at you DD but the law on regulated agreement does not or perhaps i should say cannot bend if it does then the whole empathis on regulated agreements are worthless otherwise why REGULATE ?

[patrickq1]

IFthe Document i signed was not as it was supposed to be under the HEADLINES THIS AGREEMENT IS A REGULATED AGREEMENT UNDER THE 1974 ACT...

Then the only conclusion you can draw from this is it is a fraudulent document ..because it does not represent what is written on paper as in fraud

2 Fraud by false representation

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b) intends, by making the representation—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A representation is false if—

(a) it is untrue or misleading, and

(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a

representation as to the state of mind of—

(a) the person making the representation, or

(b) any other person.

(4) A representation may be express or implied.

(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it

(or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device

designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without

human intervention).

3 Fraud by failing to disclose information

A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a) dishonestly fails to disclose to another person information which he is

under a legal duty to disclose, and

(b) intends, by failing to disclose the information—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

4 Fraud by abuse of position

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a) occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act

against, the financial interests of another person,

(b) dishonestly abuses that position, and

© intends, by means of the abuse of that position—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his

conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.

5 “Gain” and “loss”

(1) The references to gain and loss in sections 2 to 4 are to be read in accordance

with this section.

(2) “Gain” and “loss”—

(a) extend only to gain or loss in money or other property;

(b) include any such gain or loss whether temporary or permanent;

and “property” means any property whether real or personal (including things

in action and other intangible property).

(3) “Gain” includes a gain by keeping what one has, as well as a gain by getting

what one does not have.

 

[diddydicky]

i think you need to step back a few paces patrick

 

as i understand it

 

you applied for a loan for the company (limited) but the bank would not lend (presumably not a good risk)

 

but they did agree to lend it to you personally (in other words you were better security for the loan)

 

however both they and you knew the loan was really for the business.

 

now they want their money back

 

so, if they can take you to court outside of the CCA then clearly they are going to blow the whistle and show the court that although the loan was made personally to you - if was for business purposes

 

You have already been advised what the CCA has to say about loans made as personal loans- and it clearly covers a situation where someone might try to bullsh*t and pretend it is personal when it is really meant for business.

 

You now propose to face a court and say - yes it was really a loan for the business but i took it out in my own name and then put it into the business so you will just have to put up with it being a regulated loan because it says so "on the tin"

 

one word of advice....

 

Don't

[patrickq1]

he he no i would nt do that honest !

but what will happen is if you look at my link to the skeleton and the newspaper clipping and i will enter another newspaper clippin about a bent solicitor who thankfully got struck of and letter from my pal the bank manager of his gross interferance in my bussines and the phone calls he made to eu companies killed my company stone dead and withdrew the loan six weeks before it was due.....it all counts..and i thankfully have evey single scrap of paper from day one even the written admittance to libel ....so time will come..why do you think they have not gone to court over this when i instructed them in writing TAKE ME TO COURT AS I WILL NOT PAY ONE PENNY TILL A JUDGE DECIDES 1993

[nks22]

I would think the status of the loan is determined by the terms of the signed agreement. I don't see that what the bank might say it thought the loan was for or what you used the money for changes anything. The signed document is the legal agreement. Not that getting people here to share your interpretation is going to change what view a court might take.

Edited March 13, 2010 by nks22

[InformedSearcher]

i have written to experian this is the reply about default removal ?

 

I would ask that you clarify the exact basis of your dispute with HFO and the action you have so far taken in this regard.

 

We have previously queried the accuracy of this data with HFO. They have responded and stated:

 

"Please advise the customer that this account is currently being dealt with by the complaints manager Miss DiDi Nellie . Please advise the customer to contact Miss Nelson on: 0203 024 9687. In the meantime the default must remain."

 

The correspondence you have sent refers to the, now withdrawn, OFT test case regarding charges applied to current accounts. The entry you have highlighted relates to a credit card account.

 

The Office of Fair Trading previously investigated the issue of charges applied to credit card accounts and they published their results in April 2006.

 

Kind regards

 

Mr Lee Hancock

Customer Relations Executive

 

Customer Support Centre

Experian Interactive

 

 

I think you have just about zero chance of any CRA removing data. They always say that their clients enter data and your argument is with them. They will also go down the route that they only hold data on behalf of their (umentioned paying!) business clients. CRA's to me are entrapment devices and lead you down the path of you taking on in court (normally at a disadvantage) the financial institutions. I keep saying a DN is the easy and cheap route these days and just as good as a CCJ. Then they can all keep up the pressure knowing it's unlikely you'll get any credit elsewhere due to thier entry.

 

Michael

[cosalt]

i think you need to step back a few paces patrick

 

as i understand it

 

you applied for a loan for the company (limited) but the bank would not lend (presumably not a good risk)

 

but they did agree to lend it to you personally (in other words you were better security for the loan)

 

however both they and you knew the loan was really for the business.

 

now they want their money back

 

so, if they can take you to court outside of the CCA then clearly they are going to blow the whistle and show the court that although the loan was made personally to you - if was for business purposes

 

You have already been advised what the CCA has to say about loans made as personal loans- and it clearly covers a situation where someone might try to bullsh*t and pretend it is personal when it is really meant for business.

 

You now propose to face a court and say - yes it was really a loan for the business but i took it out in my own name and then put it into the business so you will just have to put up with it being a regulated loan because it says so "on the tin"

 

one word of advice....

 

Don't

 

Totally agree DD,

 

What you did with the money is irrelevant, you signed an agreement in your personal name and thats what it is, a personal agreement.

 

We've all done it...........

[patrickq1]

so, if they can take you to court outside of the CCA then clearly they are going to blow the whistle and show the court that although the loan was made personally to you - if was for business purposes

 

I DO HALF HEARTEDLY AGGREE oops caps on..but i would now be looking at STATUTE BARRED since it was 1993 when the action could have begun which it did till the oct 93 ....so i am asking if it is STATUTE BARRED then where does this leave me with the mortgage being tied to the loan on a seperate document ...?

petrickq1

[patrickq1]

SKELETON11-03-2010164532.jpg picture by patrickq1 - Photobucket

 

this is also involved the fax sent to me during a serious arguement six weeks before the contract was due to end i got this and two hours later the termination of the contract ...?

[pedross]

I would think the status of the loan is determined by the terms of the signed agreement. I don't see that what the bank might say it thought the loan was for or what you used the money for changes anything. The signed document is the legal agreement. Not that getting people here to share your interpretation is going to change what view a court might take.

 

I think this is the correct opinion. It is a personal loan regulated by the CCA because thats what the agreement states.

 

The fact that you used it for your business is not relevant in my opinion. It does not matter what was stated to be the purpose of the loan even if you said it was not for business and then changed your mind. The legal cut off is the position at the time you signed the agreement and the money released. What happened afterwards is not part of the agreement.

 

I have not read the full details so if the bank knew it was for business and encouraged you to say it was not, then that could be a different issue but you would only use that argument if it was in your favour.

 

Pedross

[diddydicky]

thats not what the cca says pedross

 

 

Exemption relating to businessesBefore section 17 of the 1974 Act insert—

“16BExemption relating to businesses

(1)This Act does not regulate—

(a)a consumer credit agreement by which the creditor provides the debtor with credit exceeding £25,000, or

(b)a consumer hire agreement that requires the hirer to make payments exceeding £25,000,if the agreement is entered into by the debtor or hirer wholly or predominantly for the purposes of a business carried on, or intended to be carried on, by him.

(2)If an agreement includes a declaration made by the debtor or hirer to the effect that the agreement is entered into by him wholly or predominantly for the purposes of a business carried on, or intended to be carried on, by him, the agreement shall be presumed to have been entered into by him wholly or predominantly for such purposes.

(3)But that presumption does not apply if, when the agreement is entered into—

(a)the creditor or owner, or

(b)any person who has acted on his behalf in connection with the entering into of the agreement,knows, or has reasonable cause to suspect, that the agreement is not entered into by the debtor or hirer wholly or predominantly for the purposes of a business carried on, or intended to be carried on, by him.

(4)The Secretary of State may by order make provision about the form, content and signing of declarations for the purposes of subsection (2).

(5)Where an agreement has two or more creditors or owners, in subsection (3) references to the creditor or owner are references to any one or more of them.

(6)Nothing in this section affects the application of sections 140A to 140C.”

5Consequential amendments relating to ss. 1 to 4

[patrickq1]

i am safe i think in the knowledge that it would be statute barred but i have the back up and data to prove gross interferance and frustration of the contract and also they knew at the time that the desire and legal request came from me to prosecute ...they did begin the legal action in 1992 and ceased i think on their barristors report to cease and steer clear of this one ...what i need is the agreement that was signed which was a deed of assignment on my property...now i am expecting them to say what is said above that whatever the loan was for it has nothing to do with the charge they seem to hold over my property although this does not show up in the land registry search but there again that is only on the free search,is it possible this was never recorded,the other worry is the loan contract being only limited to 20000 this also brings it into the CCA ACT anyway ,the balance left being 10300 or thereabouts is now in a router account,we all know from paul walton and sparkies experiance just what that can mean...

[patrickq1]

only one creditor dd me

[lookinforinfo]

Would I be right in saying that the part of the loan that was designated for the business would have been classed in this case as of unrestricted use and therefore whatever use the money was used for is irrelevant.

[pedross]

thats not what the cca says pedross

 

(1)This Act does not regulate—

 

(2)If an agreement includes a declaration made by the debtor or hirer to the effect that the agreement is entered into by him wholly or predominantly for the purposes of a business carried on, or intended to be carried on, by him, the agreement shall be presumed to have been entered into by him wholly or predominantly for such purposes.

(3)But that presumption does not apply if, when the agreement is entered into—

(a)the creditor or owner, or

(b)any person who has acted on his behalf in connection with the entering into of the agreement,knows, or has reasonable cause to suspect, that the agreement is not entered into by the debtor or hirer wholly or predominantly for the purposes of a business carried on, or intended to be carried on, by him.

 

I think it does Diddy

 

Was there a declaration in the agreement saying it was for business purposes?

 

If the declaration was not there, then the agreement is covered by the CCA. My reading of the above passage is that even if the declaration was there, but the lender suspects that it was not really for business purposes, then its still covered.

 

From what I have read so far, the declaration was not there and if it was, I agree that its not covered by the CCA.

 

Pedross

[patrickq1]

individual or company

(the Bank)giving time credit banking facilities and/or other accommodation to

COMPANY……………………………………………… …………………………………………………… .

REGISTERED OFFICE………………………………………………… ……………………………………………….( THE DEBTOR)

NOW

NAME…………………………………………………… … ………………./…………………………………………………… …………… ………….

ADDRESS……………………………………………… …………………………………………………… …………… …(THE GUARANTOR)

A. HEARBY GUARANTEE PAYMENT TO THE BANK ON DEMAND OF

B. ALL LIABILITIES OF THE DEBTOR TO THE BANK(IN WHATEVER CURRENCEY DENOMINATED)HOWSOEVER ARISING WETHER

C. PRESENT FUTURE ACTUAL OR CONTINGENT AND WETHER INCURRED SOLELY SEVERALLY OR JOINTLY AND AS PRINCIPAL OR SURETY.

(a)Provided that the total amount of such liabilities recoverable under this guarantee shall not exceed the sum of

-twenty thousand pounds- (the limit)

(delete words commencing or other such sum amount of limit where only sterling liabilities are involved)

or such other sum or sums expressed in any currency as shall at date of demand represent liabilities of the debtor to the bank the total equivalent of which in the currency of the limit (by reference to the Banks spot rate of exchange)did not when such liabilities were or in relation to several currencies the last liability was incurred exceed the amount of the limit

and(b) all liabilities of the debtor to the bank on account of interest on such sum or sums up to the date of default in repayment thereof by the debtor commission and banking charges relating thereto and all legal and other costs and expenses (on a full indemnity basis) howsoever incurred by the bank in connection therewith and so that as against the guarantor interest shall be deemed to continue to accrue and be a liability of the debtor hereby secured notwithstanding that for any reason interest may have ceased to accrue against the debtor and

(ii)Agrees to pay the bank interest on the amounts demanded under (a) and (b) above from demand hereunder until full discharge such interest to be chargeable at the rate of interest payable or deemed to be payable by the debtor(whether before or after judgement) as calculated and compounded in accordance with the practice of the bank from time to time together with all legal and other costs and expenses(on a full indemnity basis) howsoever incurred by the bank in connection with this guarantee.

the cost and expenses referred to herein shall include (for the avoidance of doubt)all amounts the bank may from time to time require to compensate it for its internal management and administration costs and expenses incurred in connection with the enforcement of this guarantee and recovery of all liabilities secured by it. a certificate signed by an officer of the bank as to the amount of such costs and expenses incurred by the bank from time to time shall for all purposes be conclusive evidence against and binding upon the guarantor.

the guarantor confirms as follows:

(1) the bank may without any consent from the guarantor and without affecting the guarantors liability hereunder renew vary or determine any accommodation given to the debtor hold over renew modify or release any security or guarantee now or hereafter held from the debtor or any other person including any other person liable under this guarantee in respect of the liabilities hereby secured and grant time or indulgence to or compound with the debtor or any such person and this guarantee shall not be discharged nor shall the guarantors liability under it be affected by anything which would not have discharged or affected the guarantors liability if the guarantor had been a principal debtor to the bank

(2) this guarantee shall be additional to any other guarantee or security now or hereafter held in respect of the moneys hereby secured

(3) this guarantee shall be continuing security and shall remain in force notwithstanding any disability or death of the guarantor until determined by three months notice in writing from the guarantor or personal representative of the guarantor but notwithstanding such determination the guarantor shall remain liable as guarantor for all liabilities of the debtor outstanding(whether or not due and payable)at the date of the expiration notice.

(4) The guarantor has not taken and will not take without written consent of the bank any security from the debtor in connection with this guarantee and any security so taken shall be held in trust for the bank and as security for liability of the guarantor to the bank hereunder.

(5) in respect of the guarantors liability hereinafter the bank shall have lien on all securities or other property of the guarantor held by the bank whether for safe custody or otherwise .the bank shall further be entitled (as well before as after demand hereunder)to set off against any credit balance in any account of the guarantor with the bank (whether current or otherwise or subject to notice or not)and against any interest accruing thereon the liability of the guarantor to the bank hereunder and if the liability or any part hereof is in different currency from a credit balance against which the bank seeks to set it of the bank shall be entitled to utilise currency of the account in credit for the purchase at its spot rate of exchange of an amount in the currency of the liability not exceeding the amount of such liability and also to pay out of the credit balance any additional sum which the bank may be required to pay such currency.

(6) (a) this guarantee shall apply to all of the above mentioned liabilities of the debtor to the bank and shall not be affected by any fluctuation in or intermediate discharge of such liabilities and until such liabilities have been discharged in full the guarantor shall not be entitled to share in any security held or money received by the bank on account of such liabilities or to stand in the place of the bank in respect of any security or money nor until such liabilities have been discharged in full shall the guarantor take any step to enforce any right or claim against the debtor in respect of any moneys paid by the guarantor to the bank hereunder or have or exercise any rights as surety in competition with the bank

(b)any moneys received by the bank in connection with this guarantee may be placed to the credit of a suspense account and such receipt shall not affect the right of the bank to claim or prove against the debtor (or any other liabilities or persons liable)for the entire amount of the liabilities of the debtor .such moneys or any part may at the banks option be applied in or towards discharge of such liabilities of the debtor as the bank may in its absolute discretion determine

(7) if this guarantee is determined or called in by demand made by the bank the bank may open a new account or accounts with the debtor or any other persons for whose liabilities this guarantee is available as security .if the bank does not open a new account it shall nevertheless be treated as if it had done so at the time of determination or calling in and as from that time all payments made to the bank shall be credited or treated as having been credited to the new account and shall not operate to reduce the amount for which this guarantee is available as security at that time.

this clause become a regulated agreement by virtue of this security and section 82 of the act

*PART V

ENTRY INTO CREDIT OR HIRE AGREEMENTS

Preliminary matters

55. Disclosure of information.

56. Antecedent negotiations.

57. Withdrawal from prospective agreement.

58. Opportunity for withdrawal from prospective land mortgage.

59. Agreement to enter future agreement void.

Making the agreement

60. Form and content of agreements.

61. Signing of agreement.

6

62. Duty to supply copy of unexecuted agreement.

63. Duty to supply copy of executed agreement.

64. Duty to give notice of cancellation rights.

65. Consequences of improper execution.

66. Acceptance of credit-tokens.

Cancellation of certain agreements within

cooling-off period

67. Cancellable agreements.

68. Cooling-off period.

69. Notice of cancellation.

70. Cancellation: recovery of money paid by debtor or hirer.

71. Cancellation: repayment of credit.

72. Cancellation: return of goods.

73. Cancellation: goods given in part exchange.

Exclusion of certain agreements from Part V

74. Exclusion of certain agreements from Part V.

 

( this guarantee shall not be discharged nor shall the guarantor ‘s liability be affected by reason of any failure of or irregularity defect or informality in any security given by or on behalf of the debtor in respect of the moneys or liabilities hereby secured nor by any legal limitation bar or restriction disability incapacity or want of any borrowing powers of the debtor or want of authority of any director manager official or other person appearing to be acting for the debtor in any matter in respect of the moneys or liabilities hereby secured or be any supervening matters rendering the performance of the obligations of the debtor illegal in any jurisdiction and such moneys or liabilities will be recoverable by the bank from the guarantor as sole or principal debtor.

(9) where there is more than one person comprised in the term “the debtor” reference to the debtor shall where the context admits take effect as reference to such persons or any of them and where the debtor is a firm shall include the person or persons from time to time constituting the firm whether or not under the same style or firm name and generally where the context so admits the singular will include the plural

(10) where this guarantee is entered into by more than one person the agreements and obligations on the part of the guarantor herein contained shall take effect as joint and several agreements and obligations and all references to the guarantor shall take effect as references to the said persons or any of them and none of them shall be released from liability hereunder by reason of this guarantee failing or ceasing to be binding as a continuing security on any others of them.

(11) payment shall be in the currency in which the liabilities of the debtor were owing or incurred or (if that currency is other than sterling) at the option of the bank in sterling such other currency being converted into sterling at the spot rate of exchange of the bank for purchasing such currency with sterling prevailing on the date of actual payment and the guarantor herby agrees to indemnify the bank against the full sterling price (including all costs charges and expenses).

(12) a certificate by an officer of the bank as to the amount for the time being due from the debtor to the bank as to the interest after demand from time to time payable hereunder or as to its applicable spot rate of exchange shall be conclusive evidence for all purposes against the guarantor

(13) a demand or notice hereunder shall be in writing signed by an officer or agent of the bank and may be served on the guarantor either by hand or post. in the case of a company service by hand may be made either by delivering the same to any officer of the company at any place or leaving the same addressed to the company at its registered office or a place of business last known to the bank. a demand or notice by post may be addressed to the guarantor at the registered office or address or place of business last known to the bank and shall be deemed to have been received on the day following the day on which it was posted and shall be effective notwithstanding it be returned undelivered and notwithstanding the death of the guarantor.

(14) any settlement or discharge between the guarantor and the bank shall be conditional upon no security or payment to the bank by the debtor or any other person being avoided or reduced for any reason and the bank shall be entitled(subject to any limit in the total amount recoverable under this guarantee) to recover the value or amount of any such security or payment from the guarantor subsequently as if such settlement or discharge had not occurred ,any liability of the guarantor under this clause(whether actual or contingent)shall be a liability in respect of which the bank may exercise the right created by clause (5) hereof.

(15) This guarantee is and will remain the property of the bank

(16) this guarantee shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England.

[nks22]

As I understood it the agreement doesn't mention any business. I'd expect a judge to take the agreement at face value unless the bank could prove it was a business loan, in which case a judge might ask why they signed the agreement they did and included a statement that it was regulated by the CCA.

[patrickq1]

the asssignmet of our proprty agreement is cca regulated as well both signed sameday