Homes at risk due to debts as small as £600, OFT says

[alfwithhair]

Interesting !

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11810763

[Undercover-Elsa]

The BBC want to get their facts right though and mention the small pointette that the banks first have to obtain a CCJ before they can get a CO if the dastardly debtor. fails to pay..

:-/

[sillygirl1]

Yes, that report is a bit outdated as it has been noted that COs are being rushed through, and now the courts have been asked to look first to see if any other route has been done before the CO is granted. It is unlikely a CO will be done on the back of a DEFENDED CCJ claim, more likely on an undefended one.

 

I can't remember where the link was to this - somewhere on the county court website.

[sillygirl1]

Hott off Credit Today

 

Charging Orders, particularly from Welcome being looked at!

 

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/news/news-item.cfm?news=2046

 

Knew there was something more going on than the BBC (who are about six months behind on all their financial stories)

[Undercover-Elsa]

Quite coincidentally, just stumbled upon this too...the OFT press release:

 

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2010/119-10

[count orlok]

I thought the new ConDems had/where going to introduce legislation that stopped charging orders on unsecured loans under 25 grand.

[Old Cogger]

Beggars belief that a CO can be obtained for a unsecured debt, the insurance/interest of possible loss to OH is reflected in interest charges used, about time this country got off its ass and treated its citizens in the correct manner, and on the so called Banks who may move out of this country through taxation, good go as we do not receive the benefit of their pressence, only they export our monies? but remember if you are being taken to court tick you do not recognise the commercial courts authority, it is just a commercial racket --should get some comments here???

[Old Cogger]

I thought the new ConDems had/where going to introduce legislation that stopped charging orders on unsecured loans under 25 grand.

 

In their case action would speak louder than words?

[harrassed senior]

Also: http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/banking/2010/11/banks-warned-over-oppressive-debt-collection-tactics---?utm_source=forum&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_campaign=box

[Undercover-Elsa]

The fear here of course is that without recourse to CO's they'll issue more Stat Demands. Legislation should address this at the same time to prevent this, by imposing the same minimum levels. Bankruptcy on account of a £750 debt is clearly ludicrous in the current economy.

I also feel that any unsecured credit agreement which does not carry the warning that you could lose your home (be it via a CO or Bankruptcy) should be exempt from these threats.

Elsa x

[cups]

You are right Elsa,,none of these 'agreements' have this on them,,we have to stand up to the banks and DCAs that are using the courts to tidy up their bad housekeeping.

 

Can you believe that anyone on here would get any type of judgement based solely on the loathsome lack of competent business practices routinely used to obtain these court orders? An LIP wouldn't stand a chance at any court,,maybe we should call ourselves a DCA, or bank and see how we get on,,wouldn't it be great to call yourself "SANTA -ANDER" or "AMERICANA - EXPRESSO" and see how the courts deal with you then?

 

Sadly Cameron and all the others are only ever thinking ahead, and they will one day want a non exec directorship at some bank or other institution, so they are nevber goingf to give them the kicking they deserve,,he can stand on his high horse and claim that he will never want his full wages or allowances,,he'll be earning shedloads once he's finished as PM.

 

Cups:roll:

[Undercover-Elsa]

Yep I totally agree - the banks, government and, frequently, the judiciary are in a cynical process of stripping all the rights, protections and benefits of the little man, to protect the fat cats.

Ironically I recently noticed in the small print on my loan agreement "this agreement can only be enforced against us if it bears our signature" Hows that for an unfair, unilaterally beneficial term? Yet they will relentlessly pursue agreements unsigned by the debtor.

[debt4get]

also have a look at this regarding charging orders

http://www.bllaw.co.uk/pdf/financeandrecoveries_0806_charging%20orders%20on%20property.pdf

[Undercover-Elsa]

Yeah, good article, have seen it before. Apart from the obvious benefits to a jointly owned property, this article, along with many similar by our DCA friends, really disgusts me.

In regard to their attitude to debtors, it reminds me of exterminatators discussing the control of rodents.

Are debtors the new vermin?

[sillygirl1]

The DCAS are the vermin, their industry creates misery and repression, even with their own employees working long hours to get their commision based salaries, and as for the poor doorstep collectors, their days must certainly be numbered as more harrassed debtors realise there are ways out - other than paying the grossly misrepresented claims from the DCAs.

 

At least the OFT is now looking at these issues in a wider context and hopefully the DCAs involved in persuing charging orders will be closed down and all members banned from working for other DCAs.