Link Financial in default. Should I demand money back?

[OnSkidRow]

I guess the thread title says it all.

Link are in default of providing a CCA, and tried the red herring of a letter saying they were looking for it. I'm happy to just send them a default template, but given the hassle and stress they've caused me (I've actually had dreams where my phone rings with debt collectors on the end ) As I was making payments through a debt consolidation plan, which I had to stop paying due to an unfair dismissal, as they are unable to provide me with a CCA and are now in default, could I argue that any money they did received was under false pretenses, and should I demand that they repay any money they received, or should I just cut my losses, send them a standard default template, and then tell them to jog on?

Thanks in advance

[Maggie_moo]

I wouldn't have thought so as the lack of a CCA generally doesn't mean you don't owe the money, just that they can't force you to pay as the account is in dispute. Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, though!

[Pinky69]

Correct. You still owe the money even though they cannot enforce it in court.

[Bazooka Boo]

should I just cut my losses, send them a standard default template, and then tell them to jog on

 

Unfortunately yes:(

 

But at least you will know better if the need arises in the future, or any freinds and family need advice!

[diamondgirl]

Did the low life buy the debt from your original Creditor or are they just chasing you for the money?

 

I have had great dealings with the low life who supposedly bought the debt from my original creditor however I'm still paying my original creditor and have not paid a penny to the low life even though they took me to court - they didn't win - the judge struck it out - never had my day in court with the low life.

 

Just like you I even dreampt about them - gosh we are poor soles - send them the account in dispute letter let them go shove themselves wherever the low life can shove themselves.

 

DG

[OnSkidRow]

Thanks for the feedback, guys

Link are claiming (as a response to the CCA request) that they bought the debt from MBNA, however, when I first received a phonecall from the phone monkeys, one of them tried to claim that I had actually signed an agreement with them

The thing is, I'm not disputing the debt itself, in so much as I know that I owe the money, I'm just disputing that I actually owe it to them (or rather, disputing their right to collect it) so all I was meaning, is if Link can't provide the CCA, thus proving their right to the money, would that mean that any money received thus far, would be wrongfully obtained? That was what made me wonder if I could claim the money back from them (as an organization) even if, in theory, the money is still owed (to MBNA)

 

This was the letter I was going to send them, does it seem to be missing anything?

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

Date:

 

Ref:

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Thank you for your letter of xx/xx/xx, the contents of which have been noted.

 

You have failed to respond to my legal request to supply me a true copy of the original Consumer Credit Agreement for the above account.

 

On **DATE** I made a formal request for a true signed agreement for the alleged account under consumer credit Act 1974 s77/8. This was signed for as delivered on the **DATE**

You have failed to comply with my request, and as such the account entered default on **DATE** (12+2 days after you made the initial request).

 

The document that you are obliged to send me is a true copy of the executed agreement that contained all of the prescribed terms, all other required terms and statutory notices and was signed by both your company and myself as defined in section 61(1) of CCA 74 and subsequent Statutory Instruments. If the executed agreement contained any reference to any other document, you are also obliged to send me a copy of that document. In addition a full statement of this account should have been sent to me detailing all debits and credits to the account.

 

Furthermore, you are aware that the Consumer Credit Act allows 12 working days for a request for a true copy of a credit agreement to be carried out before you/your client enters into a default situation.

 

This limit has expired.

 

As you are no doubt aware section 78(6) states:

 

If the creditor fails to comply with Subsection (1)

 

(a) He is not entitled , while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.

 

Therefore this account has become unenforceable at law.

 

As you have failed to comply with a lawful request for a true, signed copy of the said agreement and other relevant documents mentioned in it, Failed to send a full statement of the account and Failed to provide any of the documentation requested. You will also be aware of the CPUTR 2008 and the OFT's guidelines on debt collection which state under the title Deceptive and/or unfair methods - Examples of unfair practices are as follows - 2.8

 

(i) - 'Failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued'

 

(k) - 'Not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonable queried or disputed debt'

 

Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS.

 

Furthermore I shall counterclaim that any such action constitutes unlawful harassment.

 

Please note you may also consider this letter as a statutory notice under section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any data in relation to this account with immediate effect.

 

This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies.

 

Should you refuse to comply, you must within 21 days provide me with a detailed breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data.

 

It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’; You must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends.

 

Should you not respond within 14 days I expect that this means you agree to remove all such data.

 

Furthermore you should be aware that a creditor is not permitted to take ANY

Action against an account whilst it remains in dispute.

 

The lack of a credit agreement is a very clear dispute and as such the following applies.

 

* You may not demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you.

* You may not add further interest or any charges to the account.

* You may not pass the account to a third party.

* You may not register any information in respect of the account with any credit reference agency.

* You may not issue a default notice related to the account.

 

I reserve the right to report your actions to any such regulatory authorities as I see fit.

You have 14 days from receiving this letter to contact me with your intentions to resolve this matter which is now a formal complaint.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

Yours faithfully

[diamondgirl]

It looks okay but add all communication in writing only.

 

I sent a similar one to that and the response back was well you still owe the money.

 

Its certainly worth trying. Don't forget send it at least RD.

 

DG

[OnSkidRow]

It looks okay but add all communication in writing only.

 

I sent a similar one to that and the response back was well you still owe the money.

 

Its certainly worth trying. Don't forget send it at least RD.

 

DG

 

Thanks, I'll add in a paragraph about continuing to only accept written correspondence I think if they were to send something saying that I still owed the money, I'd send a letter back saying "Prove it..." Without a CCA, they're not going to do that, and, if they want, I'll just invite them to take me to court as well, and get it thrown out as harassment The template letters here have allowed me to play these chumps at their own game, and given me the knowledge to potentially get the debts written off either due to my own circumstances, or, because of their abusive practices The hunter has become the hunted

[Bazooka Boo]

Just to clear up a few things.

The fact that they have not or will not provide you with an enforceable CCA 'DOES NOT MEAN' that you do not owe this debt.

They are perfectly within their rights to ask for payment toward it, however with the account in dispute, they are unable to legally pursue any collection activity against you, this includes marking your credit file, or taking any legal action, CCJ's, Bailiffs Etc, as well as selling the alleged debt to another DCA.

 

So in layman's terms, you owe this money (you yourself have admitted this) but because they have not kept their paperwork in order, they are now unable to legally enforce any collection activity against you.

[OnSkidRow]

Just to clear up a few things.

The fact that they have not or will not provide you with an enforceable CCA 'DOES NOT MEAN' that you do not owe this debt.

They are perfectly within their rights to ask for payment toward it, however with the account in dispute, they are unable to legally pursue any collection activity against you, this includes marking your credit file, or taking any legal action, CCJ's, Bailiffs Etc, as well as selling the alleged debt to another DCA.

 

So in layman's terms, you owe this money (you yourself have admitted this) but because they have not kept their paperwork in order, they are now unable to legally enforce any collection activity against you.

 

Sorry, I'm a bit confused... How can they be in their rights to ask for payment against a debt, if they are unable to legally enforce any collection activity?

 

To be honest, I really don't care if they take me to court, as I know my circumstances are such, that I have no assets or savings to be handed over, no property to be awarded them, and no income to make anything more than a token gesture of payment (£1) so not only would it be in their best interests to wipe the debt off, if a judge finds out that they have been harassing a vulnerable person, I can see them getting the book thrown at them, which would again, probably result in the debt being written off...

 

Thanks for the feedback though, I'll just send them the default notice, and take it from there The money that I have a better chance of actually claiming back (or at least getting removed from the overall debt) are the bank charges which NatWest took from benefit money over a 5 year period...

[minmac]

Oh dont even get me started on link. 2 yrs or so ago I was at work when my mum phoned me. Minna she said Frank from across the road just came over with a phone number and said someone just phoned him and gave it to him, told him to come across the road and give it to you, they didnt say who it was. So I phoned this number. After telling whoever it was what had happened, I was then told they didnt actually want me but a man I used to live with ( at an address different to my parents) they asked me for his number. I said no, will pass your no on to James and tell him to call you. So I done it. 10 mins later James calls and says it is a company called Link Financial who say I owe them money for a bank account that was closed down 8yrs prior. Well to say I was livid was an under statement. I fished the no out the bin and called them demanding to know why they contacted my mums neighbour. He said.... we saw on the electoral role you lived together and now you live at so so street, as the house you are living in has an unlisted no we searched the street until we found a listed no and called them to give you the message as we think you can tell us where James noew lives!!!! I went nut s I asked asked the guy who their CEO was and was told it was a secret and then he hung up. Honest to God that is a true story. The funny thing about it was James closed that account 8yrs prior to that phone call and that was the first time anyone ever tried to make contact re a debt on it.

[angry cat]

OH MY!

 

MBNA and Link Financial do have a cosy little relationship...wonder what sort of assignment this was?

 

MBNA, normally keep a finger in the proverbial pie.

[OnSkidRow]

So they were getting 'a civilian' to pass their message on for them? :O :O Disgusting... These clowns seriously need to lose their license...

[angry cat]

This has happened to so many consumers!

The OFT imposed 'Requirements' upon Link because of this Bad Business practice...

 

The name of the CEO at is PAUL BURDELL.

[Bazooka Boo]

Sorry, I'm a bit confused... How can they be in their rights to ask for payment against a debt, if they are unable to legally enforce any collection activity?

 

Thats just it, they can ask for payment toward the debt, but they are unable to enforce any collection activity, so they cannot obtain a CCJ, send their infamous 'doorstep collectors' or mark your credit file.

 

Whilst the debt still remains, they can ask for payment, but you can simply tell them to foxtrot oscar;)

[angry cat]

Thats just it, they can ask for payment toward the debt, but they are unable to enforce any collection activity, so they cannot obtain a CCJ, send their infamous 'doorstep collectors' or mark your credit file.

 

Whilst the debt still remains, they can ask for payment, but you can simply tell them to foxtrot oscar;)

 

ERR!

 

DCA's should not process adverse data whilst there is an unresolved dispute...

 

But, many (including Link Financial) start processing and/or continue to process adverse data when the account is in dispute.

The consumer is then forced to go to the ICO, in order that the DPA Principles are complied with.

 

It is not just the CCA that is being ridden roughshod over but also the DPA!

 

AC

[Bazooka Boo]

ERR!

DCA's should not process adverse data whilst there is an unresolved dispute...

 

Which is exactly what I have said

they can ask for payment toward the debt, but they are unable to enforce any collection activity, so they cannot obtain a CCJ, send their infamous 'doorstep collectors' or mark your credit file.

 

Boo;)

[OnSkidRow]

Thats just it, they can ask for payment toward the debt, but they are unable to enforce any collection activity, so they cannot obtain a CCJ, send their infamous 'doorstep collectors' or mark your credit file.

 

Whilst the debt still remains, they can ask for payment, but you can simply tell them to foxtrot oscar;)

 

I'm liking the sound of that plan

[angry cat]

No, DCA's should not process data whilst there is an unresolved dispute, but you need to go into the DPA technical guidance in order, to ascertain what is considered as an unresolved dispute!

 

Many have argued that, where there is no agreement and/or the agreement is unenforceable that Data should not be processed.

 

However, in some cases the ICO has ruled that the debt remains, thus the data regarding the debt requires to be processed.

 

IMHO, one has to put up an extremely strong argument, backed up with evidence about the dispute, to get the adverse data removed.

 

I know, I am battling right now...!

 

AC

[Bazooka Boo]

AC, to reiterate my post, I have never said that they can process your data?

I am of the opinion that whilst there is a dispute, then the data should not be processed, including marking your credit file adversely.

 

My post clearly states this, and I fell you may have misread my advice.

[angry cat]

No, BB,

 

I did not mis-read your advice:)

 

What I am attempting to convey is;

members should not enter into a false sense of security about DCA/Assignees, who will and do process individuals data whilst in breach of s77-79 CCA.

 

The key is to challenge their processing through the CRA's and the ICO.

 

AC

[Bazooka Boo]

Ok understood!