Lexis200 v Lloyds (Gold card acc)

[lexis200]

and terms from the advance card (I need another thread for this which I'll set up later)

 

http://i508.photobucket.com/albums/s328/lizzybug78/lloydsadvanceccapage2.jpg

[citizenB]

Thanks Lexis, totally different to mine

[lexis200]

Well I sent a non-compliance letter for the SAR and got back a letter today saying that they do not keep DN's or letters from the solicitors due to the volume of them sent out.

 

Sounds rather iffy to me considering they've not mentioned it in the SAR either, so the only proof of the notice and the termination are my hard copies of the letters they told me to throw away! I'm soooo glad that even pre-CAG I had the nonce not to do that, even if I did chuck the envelopes!

[citizenB]

Dont know whether the following will be of use to you lexis.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2309556.html

 

 

Originally Posted by angry cat

HSE Enforcement Guide (England and Wales) - Service of Notices

 

See section 4:

 

4.Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 states that any document served by post (properly addressed, prepaid and posted) will be deemed to have been served at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the usual way by post, unless proved otherwise.

 

AC

 

More importantly see section 6 of the same Act..

 

 

 

You should serve the first copy of any notice (typed or written); the second must be preserved in the office records. Where appropriate a copy of the notice should be placed on the public register, (in FOD this is done through the FOCUS record).

[lexis200]

It certainly bl**dy will be CB - thank you!!

[citizenB]

It certainly bl**dy will be CB - thank you!!

 

Excellent.. does this mean you are now a bit happier and I will get my truffles

[lexis200]

Gosh you're persistent on the truffle front aren't you? Would Banoffee Muffins do instead?

[citizenB]

Gosh you're persistent on the truffle front aren't you? Would Banoffee Muffins do instead?

 

Ummm,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yep

[lexis200]

Hellooooo

 

There's been rumblings with Lloyds and I need some help pretty please:)

 

Ok, so there's two accounts, both with what look very much like proper CCA's, so I think I'm on a dead end there. On this account though, I had the default/termination combo as detailed in post #1.

 

I have not mentioned this to them before, and so far have only SAR'd them, also as shown above. Remember that the SAR does not show any details of either the DN from them or the TN from the sols. As far as I was aware though, both accounts were closed (this is what I was told - over the phone though not in writing - when the payment plans were originally implemented) and one had been defaulted.

 

There has always been a bit of confusion with this for me though, as they have never actually put a default marker on my file (although I am aware this is not something they have to do if they don't want to, even if they have sent a DN), and also I am, and always have been, receiving statements (which again I know they can choose to keep sending even if an account is defunct), and more recently there has been an 'available balance' on them. They have also sent me a few 'your balance has been reduced' letters. All very strange on a closed account, but I can only go on what I was told, right:rolleyes:

 

I recently scraped up a bit of cash and decided to make them a full and final offer. Having looked through the SAR I saw a little snippet called something like 'risk to the bank in £'s if account is written off', which was about £200 (yes hundred, not thousand), I thought I may, possibly, hopefully, be in with a chance as I offered over 1.5k on each card.

 

Anyway, letter sent SD on the 21st to the Company Secretary, received by them on the 22nd, call from them to me received on the 23rd. I have to give them their due here, they were very very quick in responding.

 

Basically the lady said the amount was not something they could consider, and when I asked what they could consider she said 85%!!! Yeah right.

 

I asked why it was so high and she said it's because the accounts are still running as credit accounts, although obviously if I tried to draw on them it wouldn't really go very well.

 

Now while I could understand that maybe they'd kept the other account going, on this one I'd had the DN and TN. I mentioned this, and she said that it was not in fact a real DN, but was just a notice of their right to stick a default on my file if they wanted to. I then said I was sure I'd had a termination notice too (didn't want to sound like I knew too much at this point), and she said that the letters I'd had at that stage would have looked pretty formal, but that as far as they were concerned it was not yet closed.

 

She then went on to say they could close it and pass it on to their debt arm (which she said would be fine as they are trained to 'help'), at which point I would get a DN and it would be properly closed for good. I did go over the DN/TN a couple more times, but she was adamant that according to their files it had not been defaulted or terminated.

 

I should say not one bit of this was done in a threatening manner by her - she was incredibly nice, and if I didn't have a deep deep mistrust of all bankers now I'd say she was actually trying to help.

 

So where the hell do I stand now?

 

I have in my possession a 100% certain default notice, but which she said was only a notice of their intention to serve a default, and a termination notice which she said 'yes, the letters can look pretty official' about, but which apparently didn't actually terminate the account.

 

Would I be right if I called back and said 'sorry, but you did do this and you then followed it with that, and even if it's not in your files it means xyz which in turn means I'm only liable for the arrears'?

 

or

 

Does the fact that they have not actually terminated the account scupper anything like that?

 

I could really do with a legal opinion on this if anyone is knocking about please?

 

If their non-termination does not over-ride the letters I received then I would hope they'd be more receptive to an offer nearer my initial figure. If it does mean that the default etc is no help to me then I guess I'm just on a payment plan for the next 45 odd years:eek:

 

Thanks anyone for opinions on this - I know it's a lot of info but I do appreciate it if you can help!

Edited September 24, 2009 by lexis200

[Spamalot]

Hi Lexis...

 

I know this of no help but I'm in a similar situation.. I had a payment arrangement with them a couple of years back and they said...over the phone... that they'd closed the account. As soon as I sacked my DMC and took over payments myself they started piling on the interst and demanding full monthly payments... I requested CCa to see where I signed to say they can withdraw the credit facility yet demand payments and add interest and charges... I am now at banging head against brick wall stage..

 

Spam.

[lexis200]

Hey spam:D

 

Yeah, they weren't great when I started on the plan - their cock up was the reason I got the default in the first place, it wasn't anything I'd done:rolleyes:

 

I have to say though that since then they have been the least troublesome, so maybe they'll perk up a bit for you?

 

I owe the most to them (by a long shot), but they have accepted proportionately the least amount and have from after the first 6 months had me on a rolling one year scheme. When I spoke to this woman yesterday she told me that they had me down on this current plan until 2014! I had no idea as they haven't contacted me (apart from to answer my letters) for ages, and according to her, if I stay on it they won't contact me for that 5 year period!

 

I hope they start treating your plan a little more like they've treated mine...

 

xx

[Spamalot]

Hi Lexis,

 

Sadly, my plan no longer exists... which is why I'm asking for the agreement they just point blank refused to agree another payment plan..my time was up. But I have no card and I have no credit so to me it seems it's a tad one sided:rolleyes:

 

Here's my thread if you fancy a chuckle..

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/206396-spamalot-lloyds-tsb-credit.html

 

Take care, Spam. :)x

[lexis200]

Aah I see. I must have just got in in time then, as I was told that the plan I'm on doesn't exist anymore either, but I guess they must have just put me on it before deciding to stop doing it. That's bad luck:(

 

I'll have a sneaky peek at yours later...

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hello you!!!

Nice to see you were back-you've been missed! I was worried it was my fault that your PC was broken after you snorted your tea all over your keyboard

Just catching up with your thread..beggars belief that they DN'd and Terminated then carried on and verbally denied it.

Seems to me though that what you have in your possession are legal documents (despite the nice lady dismissing them) which would have constituted breach of contract by terminating before the due date. Unfortunately I think the bad news is if you've carried on paying them since then it's probably reaffirmed your acceptance that the contract endures, but don't take my 'umble word for it. I do hope I'm wrong though .

Might be an idea to PM Banker_Rhymes_With or SurfaceagentX20 for an opinion?

Elsa xx

[citizenB]

Will have a little think on this one, Lexis. I too am a little worried that you have continued to pay them after receiving the DN/TNs

 

I think BRW is not available for a few more days, but you should be able to pm x20 or track andyorch down:D

[Undercover-Elsa]

Indeed in the context of activity, if Swayne & Co had paid some money to Woodchester they would have done themselves a favour because those payments would have been applied to the credit of the arrears.

(X20)

All may not be lost..more input needed

[lexis200]

Thanks chaps:)

 

No worries Elsa, only minor burns to my hands and a few electrical probs with the keyboard after reading one of your posts whilst drinking me tea:D

 

I have binged x20 a couple of days ago so hopefully he'll be able to pop in, but I do know he's busy so I'm not holding my breath just yet:D

 

Okie dokie, with the continuing to pay dilemma...

 

From my point of view (and bearing in mind that when this all happened I had no idea about my rights/CAG etc), the continuing to pay bit was done because the accounts were defunct, not despite it.

 

Basically I was told (again over the phone so I have sod all proof of this) that if I went on a payment plan it would mean the accounts would be closed and I would not be able to draw on them, which to me back then - and now actually - sounds pretty much like the end of the matter agreement wise. However, it also meant that as the accounts were closed, if I didn't keep up the payment plan they would reserve the right to action any of the things they threatened me with (again, they told me what could happen over the phone:().

 

To me then, keeping up payments on a payment plan was rather different to voluntarily paying them each month; it was a case of pay up on time or you go to court and we bankrupt you.

 

Ho hum, it's all fun and games isn't it? I have to say though I did start thinking of this one in a different light after properly pondering that phone call. After all, if I don't have any comeback to them with the default on this one I'm left with either paying them the lot:eek: or carrying on as I am for at least 5 years according to the plan she said I was on. So, if they're not adding adverse markers (well arrangement to pay is going on, but nothing worse than that) and they're not going to bother me for the next five years, then technically it's like that part of our debt doesn't exist for a while - at least in the sense that it doesn't have to stress me out worrying about it!

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hey hon

Yeah its a hard call, if you've managed to get some sort of status quo it's tempting not to rock the boat, for the sake of your peace of mind if nothing else..as long as they don't start moving the goalposts again further on up the road.

(Dear me I've done it again..multimetaphoral meanderings R Us!)

But you know what I mean..LOL

..still worth getting an opinion on the DN/TN validity aspect though to keep up your sleeve?..I just don't trust the beggars to leave you alone for long..

Elsa xx

PS. Tea Tree oil is good for burns..cr*p for keyboards though.

[lexis200]

Hey hon

Yeah its a hard call, if you've managed to get some sort of status quo it's tempting not to rock the boat, for the sake of your peace of mind if nothing else..as long as they don't start moving the goalposts again further on up the road.

(Dear me I've done it again..multimetaphoral meanderings R Us!)

But you know what I mean..LOL

..still worth getting an opinion on the DN/TN validity aspect though to keep up your sleeve?..I just don't trust the beggars to leave you alone for long..

Elsa xx

PS. Tea Tree oil is good for burns..cr*p for keyboards though.

 

definitely. I'm not going to let it lie if I have an option to tell them how they screwed up, but I'm just looking on the bright side if it turns out that I can't actually do that:) Assuming of course as you say that they don't move the goalposts and will let sleeping dogs lie, you know, looking at the silver lining if I can't turn the tables on them and hoist them by their own petard;)

[Undercover-Elsa]

[citizenB]

IMHO, I think you would stand a pretty good chance of pulling the DN/Formal Demand to pieces.

 

Although the dates on the DN are ok.. they have obviously asked you for the full amount on it. As there are no arears shown. So why did they default you if there were no arears. Are they allowed to ask for the full amount on a DN ??

 

The Formal demand/termination has been issued 7 days before the remedy date had been reached. So I guess that is unlawful recision ..

 

If you are unable to contact X20, then perhaps give supasnooper a pm and ask him to drop in ... he might be able to help out.

 

[lexis200]

Thanks cb, you're still a star:D Have bing-bonged supasnooper as suggested:)

[citizenB]

Thanks cb, you're still a star:D Have bing-bonged supasnooper as suggested:)

 

 

bingbonged... hmmm:rolleyes:

[Undercover-Elsa]

Nothing like a good bingbong on a Monday morning!

I don't think they can ask for the full amount on a DN unless they've already sent an earlier, valid DN asking for arrears?

[lexis200]

I feel I should explain....

 

When I message my friend in yahoo, I can get his attention with a noise which goes....can you guess....bing-bong:D Hence it's become known (really only by me, ahem:oops:) as bing-bonging. Obviously:D

 

You two just have such dirty minds;)

 

I think you're right, they can't ask for the full amount unless the full amount is also the arrears, and I'm fairly sure I've not been that bad! I think my worry is more that they a)don't seem to think they've issued a 'real' default and b) aren't treating the agreement as kaput, even though [problem] wrote telling me it was. Strikes me as a bit of a left hand/right hand situation with them even though they do just sit on opposite sides of the room!

 

So, even though I have the actual bits of paper which say they did default the account and did terminate the agreement, if they are now - and apparently have always been - treating it as live, would the dn/tn have any effect?

 

Does an unlawful termination only become unlawful if they follow through with what they've written, or does the mere fact that they've said it's happened screw them up, even if they don't then act on what they've said?