Letter from Mercantile Data Bureau (HELP NEEDED)

[nickformbristol]

Copies of doc sent

 

Original letter and Credit agreement

[nickformbristol]

I have tried to upload but i don't think it has worked, can anyone give me a pointer on how to do it

[nickformbristol]

[nickformbristol]

[nickformbristol]

Let me know your thought guys .

[hungrybear]

this is not an executed agreement as it stands. There are no terms as posted It's pretty close though if they magic up terms. They have attempted to make it section 18 compliant by separating out the loan and PPI but there should separate signature for both. And there should be an option to not have the PPI.

 

any other documents?

 

 

as it stands they do not have an enforceable debt from what you have posted

[nickformbristol]

No that's all I've got, so it sounds like good news for me.

 

I have also heard on the tread that they are only licensed for dept collection and not for anything else.

 

Do i just ignore the letter and see where it goes?

[kiptower]

they are going to get a charging order , WHICH may entail a CCJ

 

they aint got a bloddy clue

[hungrybear]

No that's all I've got, so it sounds like good news for me.

 

I have also heard on the tread that they are only licensed for dept collection and not for anything else.

 

Do i just ignore the letter and see where it goes?

 

perhaps you should tell them to get a charging order but you draw the line at that and would contest a county court claim - alas though that may not confuse them enough.

 

At this stage for this amount I would hit them with both barrels - ****e agreement, do they have an original DN or was it rescinded at point of sale - if they have a dn where is it. do they have a NOA compliant with the law of property act. can they prove the amount, do they have statements.

 

what do the americans call it? 'shock and awe' tactics

 

That would be my approach, but I'm not saying its right - I just like to send letters wrapped in a baseball bat to clowns like this. Charging order honestly, it really is the chuckle brothers on tour. NO hang on the chuckle brothers are successful and well like amongst their target audience.

[angry cat]

What an astonishing letter!

 

And why did they head it up: WITHOUT PREJUDICE?

 

MDB are going to pass the matter to DLC;

Why?

Obviously, MDB cannot deal with the matter themselves.

So they are going to pass the matter to another DCA in The Faccenda Group.

 

Scare tactics.

[nickformbristol]

What do you think i should do guys

[Pinky69]

As above, write and tell them that you did not receive a Notice of Assignment from the original creditor as required by the Law of Property Act 1925 S136 and have no proof that MDB has any lawful authority to contact you about this alleged debt. In addition, the application form they sent is not an enforceable agreement because:

 

1) the figure for the monthly repayment on the alleged loan is illegible

 

2) there is no option given on the form for PPI

 

3) PPI needs to be shown separately, showing the premium, interest rate and total cost of the PPI with a separate signature box

 

4) There are no Terms and Conditions and no statements

 

If you are sure they bought the debt - and only of you are sure they bought the debt - then you could bring in about the DN but check first and then we can give you more advice on that.

 

It will take a bit of brushing off because they don't know anything about consumer law but they are up the Swannee without a paddle.

[hungrybear]

What do you think i should do guys

 

First and foremost do you want to take them on and make them prove it if they can (and they may be able to who knows) or do you want to negotiate repayment plan.

 

You've already had a couple of views on the documents which puts you in a position to make that decision better.

 

Nick, it's you situation and your responsibility to make that basic decision. There are people on here who can help either way.

[Pinky69]

I wouldn't pay anyone a penny who didn't have proof they had any lawful right to collect the debt, an enforceable agreement and a lawful Default Notice. If they have bought it, they have paid not more than £1500 for it - and are asking you for the full amount. Daylight robbery but it's your call.

[hungrybear]

I wouldn't pay anyone a penny who didn't have proof they had any lawful right to collect the debt, an enforceable agreement and a lawful Default Notice. If they have bought it, they have paid not more than £1500 for it - and are asking you for the full amount. Daylight robbery but it's your call.

 

 

I agree but its not OUR decision is all I'm saying

[nickformbristol]

Guys i want to take them on, from what i've read on here they are bullys and nothing else. I stand up to bullys!

Worse case scenario i end up paying a lesser amount with a deal with them, best case i hit them hard and they right it off

I want to teach them they can't bully people, the way they word there letters intimidates .

Whats my best form of attack guys

[hungrybear]

OK I assume the letter is without prejudice because of what a judge would say about it s/he saw it. I would refer the their letter when you respond as, thinking ahead, a judge may then allow it, esp. if you ask how they propose to get a charging order without court intervention.

 

You need to write and tell them that their letter and enclosures do not constitute definitive legally enforceable proof of debt. And that before you will enter into any discussions or even consider acknowledegement of the alleged debt the must provide you with

 

a fully compliant and enforceable agreement - 127(3) prevents enforcement of what they have sent.

 

a notice of assignment from the OC compliant with the Law of Property Act 1925

 

a true copy of any default issued by the OC under 87(1) that would allow the enforcement and sale.

 

any termination notice issued under 76/98

 

full statements of account and a breakdown of how and why they believe the sum they have to be accurate.

 

 

Have I missed owt?

[Pinky69]

I think I have said the same - "it's your call" - but there is no harm in giving an opinion.

[nickformbristol]

Thanks very much for this help.

 

Is there a template i can base this letter on that you can direct me too, if not i will draft something up and post it here prior to sending to the MDB idiots!

[Pinky69]

Use Hungrybear's last post as a basis for your letter - that pretty well sums it up.

[hungrybear]

post a draft if you like and I'll set the rottweilers on it!

[nickformbristol]

Should i also include some time scale that they need to provide all this information?

[angry cat]

28 days would be deemed reasonable.

[hungrybear]

Should i also include some time scale that they need to provide all this information?

 

 

the timescale is that the matter remains in dispute until they provide the proof. You will not acknowledge or discuss the matter further unless and until they prove that there is anything that you need to discuss and that you 'certainly will not pay them money just because they say you should'. After all there isnt even a notice of assignment to prove the debt is theirs.

 

Imagine if I walked up to you in the street and said 'hoy, you, you used to have a credit card with notabank plc. Well you owe me the money now so get yer wallet out'

 

- it amounts to the same thing. they need to prove legal title and that there was a default and that there was an enforceable agreement. Until then the only timescale you need to worry about is that prescribed in the limitations act 1980.

 

so, the timescale you speak of is basically prove it before it becomes statute barred - but dont put it like that.

[nickformbristol]

OK here's my first stab at it

 

Dear Sirs,

 

I am writing to you regarding your letter dated 30th November 2009, for which i have no knowledge off the implied dept your company is associating me with.

 

The contents of the letter and enclosures do not prove to me you have definitive proof and legal enforcement of this alleged dept and before i enter into any further written discussions or even consider acknowledgment of the alleged dept you must provide me with the following original documents:

 

 

1. Fully compliant and enforceable agreement - 127(3)

 

2. Notice of assignment from the OC compliant with the Law of Property Act 1925

 

3. A true copy of any default issued by the OC under 87(1) that would allow the enforcement and sale.

 

4. Any termination notice issued under 76/98

 

5. Full statements of account and a breakdown of how and why you believe the sum allegedly owed is accurate.

 

 

I must reiterate that until the above documents are provided by your company i will not acknowledge or discuss this matter further with with Mercantile Data Bureau (MDB) or any company associated with MDB