Jump to content


Media Failing to Accurately Report CCA Issues - Let's do something about it


haggis1984
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5113 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

An article in today's Independent has peeved me off quite a bit:

 

Simon Read: Wriggling out of debt is not proper justice - Loans & Credit, Money - The Independent

 

Innacurate, self righteous and moralising.

 

Im feeling like taking some inspiration from www.medialens.org.

 

For anyone who's not familiar with that site, they encourage readers to email journalists and challenge innacurracies and prejudices. In light of the constant innacurate reporting on CCA issues in the media it seems like we need some caggers to do the same. Ill be emailing Mr Read at [email protected] (his email address is published alongside his articles) to try and correct the innacuracies in his article. Would be great if others could do the same and post their emails and any replys here.

I have no legal qualifications whatsoever, so please check any input I have for accuracy. And please correct me if you disagree!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Email:

 

Dear Mr Read,

 

I enjoy your saturday comment in the Independent's Money section. In today's column you rightly highlight the potentially dubious tactics of some claims handling companies in encouraging borrowers to have their debts declared unenforceable. You are of course correct to point out that the claims companies incentive is financial, and there is the possibilliy that they could cause borrowers extra hardship.

 

Unfortunately therre are some innacuracies, and a distinct sense of moralising in today's article. To the innacuracies first:

 

You state that a ruling by Judge David Waksman on 30th December has 'blown the claims companies arguments to bits.'

 

You then go on to state that 'lenders can demand payments of debts and can register black marks with credit reference agencies.'

 

You're consequent analysis of that ruling suggests that you are actually referring to the case of Mcguffick vs HSBC, which dealt with the issue of enforceablillity under the Consumer Credit Act. It was in this judgement that demanding payment and registering missed payments with Credit Reference Agencies were found not to consitute enforcement. One question an impartial journalist could ask is ''If these actions do not consititute enforcement what does?!'

 

You also state that 'a copy of the original agreement rather than the original would be enough.' You seem to imply that this would be sufficient for the creditor to recover the debt in court. This is untrue. Mcguffick vs HSBC solely addressed the issue of the satisfaction of a request under section 77-78 of the Consumer Credit Act for a copy of the credit agreement. This does not change the fact that in order to recover monies in court the creditor must still provide an agreement bearing the creditors siganture. Again, in light of the recent high profile cases of banking incompentence a resposnible, imnpartial journalist might ask the question 'How can it be prooved that this copy is indeed a copy of the original?,' or 'What's to stop the banks simply making agreements up as they go along?!'

 

Lastly, you're statement that 'beyond the moral principle there's something else at stake - justice,' requires rebuttal. Is there anyone in this country who believes for a second that any large organisation such as a bank would make payments which they are not legally obligated to make? Of course not, it would be irresponsible and infuriating to shareholders. Why then, Mr Read, when the boot is on the other foot, should consumers feel obliged to make payment on monies which would not be recoverable in court? (and thus not legally obligated to repay).

 

It should also be considered that in order to comply with the Data Protection Act creditors as data controllers must secure the written consent of the data subject to process data (for example, register 'black marks' with credit reference agencies). This permission would be found on the original credit agreement. If no such agreement exists, there is a clear breach of the Data Protection Act.

 

Perhaps you're future columns on this subject could be more balanced,

 

I look forward to your next column

 

Best Regards,

  • Haha 1

I have no legal qualifications whatsoever, so please check any input I have for accuracy. And please correct me if you disagree!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Email:

 

 

You state that a ruling by Judge David Waksman on 30th December has 'blown the claims companies arguments to bits.'

Thought the judgement was made on the 23rd December.

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder how much Mr. Read was paid re: writing that article?

 

Simon Read - journalisted.com

 

Do not believe everything that is written in the papers;

journalists are notorious for altering (editing) the facts in order; for a good story!

 

I would suggest that Mr. Read should go back to his desk and re-read the jusdgement...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this bloke living in the real world?

 

" Banks do make mistakes and should be brought to book for them"

 

They where, they just asked the government for our money and carried on as nothing had happened while still harrassing people to the end of the earth.

 

And his comment about CAB and their money advisors. Thats a joke. You try and find anyone at CAB who is quailfied to deal with money matters. Only a select few branches.

 

CAB are also a government funded organisation so I believe that they are told to get as many people paying back what they owe even when an unenforceable agreement is in place.

 

He hasn't had to deal with feeding the kids and keeping a roof over his head when the DCA's keep demanding more and more from people or the CCC that keep increasing their the interest rates when the trend has been declining interest rates since 2002. How can they justify increasing my interest rate from 15.9% to 34.9% overnight and because I lost my job when the base rate is 0.5% and the libor rate (Libor refers to an overhaul in the way big banks set the rate they lend to each other, known as the 'inter-bank rate'. Libor is the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate and is one of the global benchmarks for the cost of borrowing.) has been running at 12month 1.5%. What this means is that the bank & CCC are basically loan sharks. The only difference between them and real loan sharks is they have a licence, but in my book they are both much the same.

 

And yet nobody i.e. the government carries out the threat of revoking credit licences if they don't behave. They just make a noise and move on.

 

I think this tw*t should do abit more homework and actually get to the bottom of what causes people to take this route when most but not all the banks, CCC just break all the rules as they see fit and charge whatever they like. When we the consumer fight back the banks, CCC go running off to the courts and say please help us as this can't go on as it'll finish us. Well tough sh*t in my book.

 

Wake up and smell the coffee and the people are growing in numbers and are not affraid of you anymore.

 

He end the lesson.

 

Scrapper Coco :cool:

Edited by Scrapper

"I just want to make people silky-smooth!"

 

Scrapper vs MBNA Partial Settlement Success. Saved £13,000 :lol:

Scrapper vs Barclays Bank Plc PPI Reclaim Success £5,500 :lol:

Scrapper vs Barclaycard Partial Settlement Success. Saved £6,000 :lol:

 

Scrapper vs Tesco's FOS upheld complaint. Possible court action to get default removed

 

Scrapper vs Egg (Barclaycard) Awaiting FOS

 

Scrapper vs Barclays Bank Plc Offered made & Refused. This means war :-x

Scrapper vs Barclaycard (Cabot) Waiting 4 years for CCA. Cabot advised irresolvable :lol:

 

Scrapper vs Intelligent Finance. Success

 

Scrapper vs Picture (Webb Resolutions) Success

 

 

Beginner's guide

 

Advice & opinions given by Scrapper are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could have had a lot to do with editorial input too.

Beaten:

RBS: £4,500

AMEX: £4,200

Barclaycard Visa: £12,100

Barclaycard M/Card: £12,600

(Including the numerous DCAs they have set on me.)

PPI reclaims (into my bank account): £25,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ta for encouragment guys :)

 

Lets see some of your emails too - if enough of us write to him he may actually produce a more balanced piece in future.

 

Itd be great if we could pick out similair examples in other papers too.

I have no legal qualifications whatsoever, so please check any input I have for accuracy. And please correct me if you disagree!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could have had a lot to do with editorial input too.

 

it has everything to do with editorial input and weak minded journos.

 

papers are on the brink, the massive overdrafts they run help them survive... hence the "interesting" reporting that tends to lean in favour of the banks at every given turn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it has everything to do with editorial input and weak minded journos.

 

papers are on the brink, the massive overdrafts they run help them survive... hence the "interesting" reporting that tends to lean in favour of the banks at every given turn.

 

Defo think youve got a point there. There's also Chomsky's Propoganda Model, which explains a lot of media failings.

I have no legal qualifications whatsoever, so please check any input I have for accuracy. And please correct me if you disagree!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoot me down in flames if you want - and I agree with the argument in principle that when the law says an original agreement should be produced then the law should be upheld,however does this not just call for a change to the law where if the lender can not produce the actual original document they should be forced to re-work the loan at say 1 or 2 % APR . The borrower would probably still be due a refund in lots of cases - but at least this gets over the "moral" argument of re-paying debts.

 

This would mean the case could be dealt with probably with the FOS and without clogging up the courts.

Please note I am not an expert - I am not offering opinions or legal help - Please use all the information provided on the site in FAQ- step by step instructions and library- thanks Jansus:)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/images/icons/icon1.gif

offer from A&L 24/8/07 - after case stayed

 

"What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." - Antione de Saint Exupery

 

 

PROUD TO BE AN ORANGE

Link to post
Share on other sites

What do people make of this BBC article? Suggesting challenges based on demanding a copy of the original CCA are completely dead. If its wrong, might I suggest someone who is more clued up than me challenge the article through the BBC complaints process which is pretty comprehensive.

 

BBC News - Banks win partial High Court victory on credit cards

Edited by Pursuit of Happiness
Link to post
Share on other sites

What do people make of this BBC article? Suggesting challenges based on demanding a copy of the original CCA are completely dead. If its wrong, might I suggest someone who is more clued up than me challenge the article through the BBC complaints process which is pretty comprehensive.

 

BBC News - Banks win partial High Court victory on credit cards

 

IMO this ruling applies should the debtor bring a case against the creditor and the statute still applies as previously should it be the creditor bringing proceedings against the debtor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Courts don't enforce morals. They enforce, or at least ought to since they started rewriting the CCA, the law.

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afternoon all.

 

No reply yet then Haggis. How surprising. Now that he has given his 'expert' opinion on this he will probably be off giving his 'expert' opinion on the faliure of council gritting plans.

He's a vulture, no different to to DCA phone whallas. He makes money off the misery of others.

Edited by johnerog
Misspelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Have had a reply actually :)

 

No discussion of the issues I bought up in my email, but Mr Read has shown an interest in the CAG.

 

Im waiting on hearing from admin to see if we can take it further.

I have no legal qualifications whatsoever, so please check any input I have for accuracy. And please correct me if you disagree!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Have had a reply actually :)

 

No discussion of the issues I bought up in my email, but Mr Read has shown an interest in the CAG.

 

Im waiting on hearing from admin to see if we can take it further.

 

ooooop's Obviously a nice vulture!!!

A very nice vulture. I remember saying just the other day what a nice....................

Link to post
Share on other sites

ooooop's Obviously a nice vulture!!!

A very nice vulture. I remember saying just the other day what a nice....................

 

Lol I remember clearly you were telling anyone who would listen how much of a great guy he is :D

I have no legal qualifications whatsoever, so please check any input I have for accuracy. And please correct me if you disagree!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoot me down in flames if you want - and I agree with the argument in principle that when the law says an original agreement should be produced then the law should be upheld,however does this not just call for a change to the law where if the lender can not produce the actual original document they should be forced to re-work the loan at say 1 or 2 % APR . The borrower would probably still be due a refund in lots of cases - but at least this gets over the "moral" argument of re-paying debts.

 

This would mean the case could be dealt with probably with the FOS and without clogging up the courts.

 

it would make a sensible idea on the provisio that no intrest was charged and all bank charges refunded and penalties removed

patrickq1

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...