Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • sorry I have been confused by Statute Barred meaning. I thought with Statute Barred the debt cannot be chased 6 years after you have stopped paying.  Originally I set up a payment arrangement with all the companies around 2008 when things went horribly wrong. At that time the payment arrangement was with the original creditors.  I still have one of the original creditors who I pay each month (Cap1). I thought that if you make a payment arrangement you have to stick to that situation throughout. Also, MDR (Moorcroft) have been taking a monthly payment on behalf of M & S Bank for about 5 years. When I sent MDR a CCA request I got a copy of the original agreement sent to me directly by M & S Bank about 5 weeks after my CCA request. Sorry for my ignorance but would you suggest I stop paying all including Cap1 who are the original creditor? TIA
    • London1971 without divulging too much into his mental health he has issues regarding anything to do with government and so is it ok to fill the forms provided and what do I put on there  thanks  
    • Dear all, I am hoping for some advice/guidance on this matter. I received a LoC dated 12/04/24 and replied to this on the 2/05/24 disputing claim with the following reasons: 1: [Inadequate Affordability Assessment]: I contend that your institution failed to conduct a thorough assessment of my financial circumstances prior to approving the loan. As a result, the loan amount and repayment terms were not suitable for my income and financial situation. 2: [Unsustainable Repayments]: The repayment schedule imposed by the loan agreement placed an undue burden on my finances, making it impossible for me to meet my other financial obligations without experiencing significant hardship. 3: [Lack of Transparency]: Your institution did not adequately disclose the risks associated with the loan, including any potential increases in interest rates or fees over the loan term. I also added the following: Under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regulations, lenders have a legal obligation to conduct thorough affordability assessments and ensure that loan agreements are suitable for borrowers' circumstances. I hereby request that your institution: 1: Conduct a full investigation into my claim of irresponsible lending. 2: Provide me with copies of all documentation related to the loan application and approval process, including affordability assessments, credit checks, and correspondence. 3: Cease all collection activities related to the loan until this matter is resolved. Yesterday i received the attached reply via email and it included: 1: The Original Loan agreement 2: An account statement 3: A copy of a default notice letter. The email included a link for a direct debit set up page where you enter their reference and your bank account details (looks like a standard D/D set up page) but there is nothing to indicate the amount of the D/D that I might be agreeing to. I also think two days response time is not long enough to appropriately reply. Any thoughts appreciated   Email-compressed.pdf
    • Easy to set one up on Gov.uk , search on Google.
    • Hi London  he doesn’t have government gateway. Should we do it via post?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

PastDue Credit Solutions


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5168 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

Hi! I've been reading this thread with interest as I am in a similar position.

 

Last year, I received some letters from PastDue Credit Solutions informing me that I owed over £500 to British Gas dated back to 2005.

 

During that period, I was renting my flat and had old coin meters for both gas and electricity, which was emptied by the then landlords.

 

3 years ago, I purchased the flat I have been living in. The freeholder refurbished the block and installed new meters and I opened an account with BG and EDF. Since then, I have paid all bills on time and in full and BG have never contacted me about this supposed debt.

 

Today, I have received a letter titled 'Pre-Visit Notice' from Philips Specialist Bailiff and Debt Recovery Agents, telling me to pay the full amount "Regarding outstanding arrears on behalf of PastDue credit Solutions".

 

Please can you advise me on the best course of action? Should I ignore this as I did with the PastDue letters or ask them to provide some sort of proof of debt?

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Edited by FISHBUS
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

i would ignore

there is nothing they can do to you.

 

phishing list me thinks.

 

if the OC wanted their money, they would of contacted you direct.

 

also do not be intimidated by Philips Specialist Bailiff and Debt Recovery Agents

they cannot use their bailiff powers to recover this debt

 

bit out of order to use such a co. title anyhow me thinks...

 

you also need to start your own threads.

 

jumping on the end of someone elses old thread might not get you question seen

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I thought that tagging it on the end of a still active and relevant thread would be the way to go...sorry about that.

 

Anyway, thanks for the reassurances. Do I take it then that they cannot 'pay me a visit' and have no rights to attempt entry to my home?

 

Is it also correct that this can only be done if it has gone through the courts?

 

What options are open to them if I continue to ignore their letters?

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

the debt will be passed around on the phishing list to the next leecher to try their arm at fleecing a mug that now knows better.

 

the bit about 'entry' is what i was pointing too,

you are correct that it would have to go to court etc etc.

but they are operating under their DCA role here and a DCA has NO LEGAL POWERS

they are not bailiffs assigned by a court etc etc.

 

all you have is a letter to try and con you into paying by inicating they might visit you, if they ever did, you tell them to go away.

 

i'd ignore them totally

 

dx

 

i'd ignore them.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll get this turned into a thread then you will have ref to return to when you get the next phishing letter!

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...