Jump to content
  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Can you ask your GP to get a second opinion on the NHS?  (I ought to know because I'm a retired NHS manager, but worked in mental health where x-rays didn't really feature very much(!).)   Your GP may be reluctant for various reasons but you've got nothing to lose by asking.  Might be difficult if there's only one consultant in that specialty locally.   If that is a non-starter, you could ask your GP for a private referral if any of the relevant specialists run private clinics.  Your son'll get seen quicker and an initial private consultation shouldn't cost more than about a couple of hundred quid.  Then take it from there.   (Emphasise to your GP what your real concerns are and why you have them - even if it's just "I looked it up on the internet and it looks like this which can lead to serious complications.  What do you think?  I'm really worried...")   EDIT:  Just looked on my local NHS Clinical Commissioning Group website and searched for "second opinion" but nothing comes up...  I thought you were entitled to one - you'll have to ask your GP.  Or look on your own CCG site.  Oh - despite being a NHS manager I have paid to see a consultant privately.  £150 well spent - if you can afford it... which I appreciate not everyone can.
    • dont think they are even allowed to offer settlement by instalments, they are not creditors.   read the letter carefully and understand what it doesn't actually say....like the word WILL anywhere.   they,  a DCA, can't recommend anything and their client most certainly wouldn't have disclosed anything to a powerless DCA about what their solicitors might or might not have said to them. and ofcourse a solicitor is in no position whatsoever to suggest to their client they get back to the DCA and tell the DCA to tell you their client will accept instalments!   the letter is a load of ole BS that is concocted by the dca without any input or knowledge of their client nor their clients solicitor...   dx      
    • The paediatric orthopaedic consultant at the fracture clinic told us today that he believes it is just a sprain behind the knee. I'm concerned my GP will say something along the lines of, 'you have seen a consultant, he says it will heal in 2 to 3 weeks, you don't know more than him!', or something like that. It's just that I believe I can clearly see a fracture. And as there was no fall or hard knock, only a very tightly streched knee bending at an angle behind, with a load. I figured that the temdon must have pulled some bone up. And thats the injury I found online. I totally take on board what you are saying. You are correct. I guess I'll see what my GP says tomorrow, hopefully she allows me to email the images, if she doesent have access to them already. Thanks again
    • With the global market for recycled cardboard worth billions of dollars, it is attracting criminals. View the full article
    • UK house prices are predicted to fall but a report spells out why property may remain out of reach. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • Curry’s cancelled my order but took the money anyway. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423055-curry%E2%80%99s-cancelled-my-order-but-took-the-money-anyway/
      • 11 replies
    • Father passed away - Ardent Credit Services (Vodafone) now claiming he owes money. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/423040-father-passed-away-ardent-credit-services-vodafone-now-claiming-he-owes-money/
      • 9 replies
    • Currys Refuse Refund F/Freezer 5day old. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422656-currys-refuse-refund-ffreezer-5day-old/
      • 6 replies
    • Hi,  
      I was in Sainsbury’s today and did scan and shop.
      I arrived in after a busy day at work and immediately got distracted by the clothes.
       
      I put a few things in my trolley and then did a shop.
      I paid and was about to get into my car when the security guard stopped me and asked me to come back in.
       
      I did and they took me upstairs.
      I was mortified and said I forgot to scan the clothes and a conditioner, 5 items.
      I know its unacceptable but I was distracted and Initially hadn’t really planned to use scan and shop.
       
      No excuse.
      I offered to pay for the goods but the manager said it was too late.
      He looked at the CCTV and because I didn’t try to scan the items he was phoning the police.
       
      The cost of the items was about £40.
      I was crying at this point and told them I was a nurse, just coming from work and I could get struck off.
       
      They rang the police anyway and they came and issued me with a community resolution notice, which goes off my record in a year.
      I feel terrible. I have to declare this to my employer and NMC.
       
      They kept me in a room on my own with 4 staff and have banned me from all stores.
      The police said if I didn’t do the community order I would go to court and they would refer me to the PPS.
       
      I’m so stressed,
      can u appeal this or should I just accept it?
       
      Thanks for reading 
      • 16 replies
broccoli_greens

Worth paying in full?

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3615 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hoping you can help with this one.

 

I have multiple defaults on my credit file now and I'm trying to save up to do some full and final settlements. Given the defaults being on there, is there any advantage to me in aiming to save the entire balance of the debt up (it'll take a great deal longer but probably achievable one way or another), or would I be in exactly the same position either way, even with "partially settled" all over my file?

 

If the defaults will rule me out of all credit for the whole six years until they come off my file, there's little point postponing making offers for reduced settlements. Am I right, or is it still better to have 'settled in full' on the record despite the defaults?

 

broc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wont make any odds

default, setlled, partial settlement, ccj

 

they are all viewed the same...........bad.

 

have you looked at making sure these defaults are correct

 

i'e default notice gave correct date to rememdy by?

the dn did not contain any unlawful fees in its figure?

 

etc etc

 

there are lots of ways dn's are invalid and LOTS of them are just that...invalid.

 

dx


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming some were faulty, and I got them removed, couldn't they just issue new ones? I'm sure a few have issues from memory. I posted them on this forum when I got them ages ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you cannot have two default notices for the same 'default sum'

so if the first is invalid, no, they can't re-issue a correct one for the same ammount

 

dx


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the first is invalid, it'll be a good defence in court, won't it? That much I'm pretty sure of - the account was closed improperly.

 

they wont/cant go to court on an invalid DN

 

But realistically speaking, if the paper notice is invalid, am I likely to get the corresponding CRA entry removed?

 

yes if the default was as a result of a faulty DN - MUST be removed

 

 

The bottom line is that I am in default. And, realistically again, are the creditors and CRAs likely to leave my file free of a new DN if the first was invalid?

 

you cannot be defaulted twice for the same event!!

 

They're unlikely to accept that the DN is invalid without first taking me to court, aren't they?

 

as above

they will not dare to go near the court with a faulty DN, they will be blown right out the water.

 

 

Whatever the technicalities, it's the presence of the DN on my file that causes the problem. I don't want to waste my time going down this route, or save like hell to pay in full, unless I can actually clean up the CRA file a bit with some chance of success.

 

as in post 2

 

 

What do you think?

 

Thanks again,

broc

 

 

dx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hoping you can help with this one.

 

I have multiple defaults on my credit file now and I'm trying to save up to do some full and final settlements. Given the defaults being on there, is there any advantage to me in aiming to save the entire balance of the debt up (it'll take a great deal longer but probably achievable one way or another), or would I be in exactly the same position either way, even with "partially settled" all over my file?

 

If the defaults will rule me out of all credit for the whole six years until they come off my file, there's little point postponing making offers for reduced settlements. Am I right, or is it still better to have 'settled in full' on the record despite the defaults?

 

broc

 

If I was in your postion I would wait until the creditor proposes a F&F that way you would have the upper hand in negotiations.

 

If you offer a F&F the creditor will think 'great, broccoli greens has money, we'll get every penny'. The creditor wont just want some of your money, they will want it all!


]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hoping you can help with this one.

 

I have multiple defaults on my credit file now and I'm trying to save up to do some full and final settlements. Given the defaults being on there, is there any advantage to me in aiming to save the entire balance of the debt up (it'll take a great deal longer but probably achievable one way or another), or would I be in exactly the same position either way, even with "partially settled" all over my file?

 

If the defaults will rule me out of all credit for the whole six years until they come off my file, there's little point postponing making offers for reduced settlements. Am I right, or is it still better to have 'settled in full' on the record despite the defaults?

 

broc

 

If I was in your postion I would wait until the creditor proposes a F&F that way you would have the upper hand in negotiations.

 

If you offer a F&F the creditor will think 'great, broccoli greens has money, we'll get every penny'. The creditor wont just want some of your money, they will want it all!


]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your help everyone - appreciate it.

 

On the default notice question, is there a definitive guide somewhere on the site? I'll go have a root around but if anyone has the link handy.... :)

 

Something that shows what criteria a valid DN would have to meet?

 

Thanks,

broc

Edited by broccoli_greens
Clarify what I'm asking for re. a definitive guide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The requirement for a valid Default Notice to lawfully Terminate an Account whilst in default

1. Notwithstanding the matters pleaded above, the Claimant must under Section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 serve a valid Default Notice before they can demand early payment of sums not yet due under a Regulated Credit Agreement.

2. Under the Interpretation Act 1978 Section 7, it states:

Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expressions "give" or "send" or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post."

2. Practice Direction

Service of Documents - First and Second Class Mail.

With effect from 16 April 1985 the Practice Direction issued on 30 July 1968 is hereby revoked and the following is substituted therefore.

1). Under S7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 service by post is deemed to have been effected, unless the contrary has been proved, at the time when the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

2). To avoid uncertainty as to the date of service it will be taken (subject to proof to the contrary) that delivery in the ordinary course of post was effected:-

(a) in the case of first class mail, on the second working day after posting;

(b) in the case of second class mail, on the fourth working day after posting.

"Working days" are Monday to Friday, excluding any bank holiday.

3). Affidavits of service shall state whether the document was dispatched by first or second class mail. If this information is omitted it will be assumed that second class mail was used.

4). This direction is subject to the special provisions of RSC Order 10, rule 1(3) relating to the service of originating process.

8th March 1985

J R BICKFORD SMITH Senior Master

Queen's Bench Division

3. Further to point 2 above, CPR rules on service also state the required timescales to be given for

serving of documents :-

Under CPR 6.26 First class post (or other service which provides for delivery on the next business day) is deemed to be “served” The second day after it was posted, left with, delivered to or collected by the relevant service provider provided that day is a business day.

4. The Default notice supplied by the Claimant is dated Friday 3rd August, to allow service in line with the statutory requirements mentioned in points 2 & 3 above, 2 working days were required to allow for 1st Class postage. Thus the Rectify date should be 14 calendar days from Wednesday 8th August, namely Wednesday 22nd August 2007, not the 14 calendar days from the date of the letter as stated in the Default notice which would have been 17th August.

5. I therefore put the Claimant to strict proof that any Default Notice sent to me was valid and allowed the statutory 14 clear days to rectify the breach. I also note that to be valid, a Default

Notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237).

6. The failure of a Default Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119.

7. It is submitted that the above Default Notice served s87(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 failed to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561).

8. For a Creditor to be entitled to terminate a regulated Credit Agreement where there is a breach, demand repayment in full or take any legal action to recover any monies due under the Agreement, a creditor must serve a Default Notice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which

states:

Section 87. Need for Default Notice

(1) Service of a notice on the Debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "Default Notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the Debtor

or hirer of a regulated Agreement -

(a) to terminate the Agreement, or

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

© to recover possession of any goods or land, or

(d) to treat any right conferred on the Debtor or hirer by the Agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

(e) to enforce any security.

9. The Act also sets out via Section 88(1), that the Default Notice must be in the prescribed form, as below:

Section 88. Contents and effect of Default Notice

(1) The Default Notice must be in the prescribed form…

10. The wording must make it clear that no variation is acceptable. Therefore it cannot be dispensed with as a De Minimus issue.

11. I note that the regulations do not allow any variation in the form of these statements and therefore it is suggested that where the statements are not as laid down in the regulations the Default Notice is rendered invalid as a consequence.

12. In the case of Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339 in the Court of Appeal, the Court addressed in some detail the issue of the contents of a Default Notice and should the notice fail to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) it would render the Default Notice invalid I quote the comment of KENNEDY LJ: "This statute was plainly enacted to protect consumers, most of whom are likely to be individuals" the judgment appears to confirm the consumer credit legislation made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as plainly enacted and set out to offer protection to the consumer. Therefore it is suggested that the failure of the Claimant to set out the Default Notice in accordance with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) could unduly prejudice me as it failed to allow the required time to remedy the alleged default.

13. The Claimant’s failure to issue a valid Default Notice must surely prevent a right of action and would make any termination of the Agreement unlawful, as statute provides the procedure that must be followed. Since the Claimant has failed to adhere to statutory procedure it is averred that the Claimant does not have a right of action, and can never now have a right of action having terminated the Agreement unlawfully.

14. Furthermore, the Arrears Total outlined cannot be accurate, as the Balance on the Account was at least partly comprised of Unlawful Charges plus additional Charges and interest added unlawfully whilst the Account was in Dispute. Therefore, the Arrears claimed cannot be accurate, as they are themselves calculated using a Total that was itself inaccurate.

15. This is at all times an Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. There is no provision in the Act that allows a large financial institution to terminate an Agreement that is in alleged default or breach simply by giving notice to the Consumer. Section 98(6) makes that quite clear. The Creditor must follow the steps outlined in Section 87 and Section 88 if they are to lawfully Default and Terminate, and enjoy the benefits of Section 87.

16. Finally, an invalid Default Notice cannot be remedied by simply issuing a new Default Notice.

The Claimant may not serve a second effective default notice in prescribed form post-termination of the agreement. Any such second default notice will necessarily state a date by when I would be required to comply after which in default the agreement would terminate. The second default notice would therefore contain the fiction that the agreement endured when that cannot be the case, as it was terminated on XX/XX/XX. Terminating an Agreement on the back of a defective Default Notice, simply confirms the undeniable truth that Termination of the agreement by the Claimant was carried out in circumstances which then prohibited them from enjoying the benefits of Section 87, namely the opportunity to seek early Payment of a sum that was, prior to Termination, only payable in the future.

 

 

plenty more

 

just use advance search for:

 

invalid default notice

 

dx


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks dx. I'll take a closer look at the DNs I've received and maybe post a few to verify that I've understood correctly.

 

Appreciate your help.

 

broc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dx,

 

I've rooted out my various default notices, some of which are obviously full of problems and others a bit more ambiguous. I'll post them one at a time for while in this forum so I get a clear picture on each. However, I'm wondering about dates in particular.

 

Your example above differs from what I've found elsewhere and I'm wondering whether I'm missing something. Let's take an example:

 

Date of DN: Monday 20 Sept 2010

Deemed Served: Wednesday 22nd September 2010 (the second working day after posting) - your example above would have it on Thursday instead? Why?

Earliest date to rectify: Wednesday 6th October 2010 ([not less than fourteen days] after the date of service)

 

Also a few of my DNs were issued on Saturday. The second working day after posting would still be Tuesday wouldn't it?

 

Thanks,

broc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not mine

thats from the OFT i think.

 

1st class is 2 working days, 2nd class is 4 working days

 

dx


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...