Halifax and phantom Default Notice

[diddydicky]

i see after 2 re reads- where the "plank came from" -

 

you are far better thought- as patrick said- to sit back and let THEM start the action- you can still take control of things from a defensive position with much less costs risks.

[jowil1973]

Hi all,

 

I have sat back and thought about this for a little while and I am still struggling with a few things.

 

Before anyone jumps in with 'because I said so' type comments please consider that I do not wish to be gung ho, my queries are serious and considered. I can also appreciate that there are 'moral' arguments on both sides. I have heard the 'better off leaving it to someone with more knowledge and clout' argument but there is no one stepping up to defend the consumer. I am after honest, serious responses that explain the thought process and rationale behind them.

 

I have represented myself in Court against the banks already and whilst I have experienced the frustrations of being an LIP in our legal system I have had good success. Far more than I have received by any other means.

 

As someone that doesn't own a house etc. I fail to see what huge risk there is? The banks can not take what I haven't got. They have broken the law (and the contract) I have not.

 

If however action is ill advised I would like to know if there is any way of avoiding the years of misery of waiting for statute barred?

 

As such I would appreciate some responses to the following points

• I'm sure they will not take legal action, they have said as much, so Defence is unlikely to be an option.
  
• While I'm sure I can (eventually) ward off all the DCA hounds, in the meantime my financial status has to go on hold as my credit rating is rubbished. This has many far reaching effects.
  
• In the meantime they continue to add charges and interest, so the level of the alleged debt goes up and up. Is there a way of forcing action from them so even if I lose the amount owed is fixed?
  
• If I'm right the only option left is to wait for statute barred, meaning 6 years of this headache?
  
• Does it take a further 6 or 7 years after that before the black marks are removed from the CRA's?
  
• It seems the legal routes are slowly but surely turning more and more in the banks favour. Who can say that statute barred won't disappear as an option before the 6 years are up?
  
• They have undoubtedly unlawfully rescinded the account, wouldn't I be better off taking that to Court as an LIP while it is still possible to win on such grounds?
  
• What really is the worst that could happen?
  

Thanks in advance for any replies where people explain the pros and cons honestly... I really do want to understand.

[jowil1973]

Still no comments from anyone??

 

RW have now written to say they may do a home visit. Still no notice of assignment and the CRA's are still showing the Default as under Halifax.

 

I am replying with an harassment & I'll report you letter... but they've already had one of those and seem happy to ignore it.

 

Anyone willing to give some practical advice and responses to my last post?

[jowil1973]

Anyone??