Moorcroft chasing Lloyds loan now sold to 1st credit

[batman1956]

Hi Intend, Schemeing bunch,

 

To Nelson Guest

 

Ref: as on their letter.

 

Sirs,

 

I am in receipt of your most generous offfer of a discount on the alleged debt for £xxxxx , as you are well aware, presuming your ''client'' has informed you that this matter is in dispute as your client is in default of a lawful request made under section 77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to produce a fully compliant copy of the regualted agreement pertaining to this account I am sure you are aware of the limitations this places on their actions.

 

I also notice that correspondence suggests that ''payments'' can be made by credit card encouraging alleged debtors to borrow further to meet the alleged debt, I sure you are aware of the OFTs take on this matter.

 

I cannot therefore acceed to your request to phone you or to agree to make any payment reagarding any alleged debt, for which I make no acknowledgment of liability.

 

RD intend let me know what happens.

 

Should read NO acknowledgement of liability.

[intend]

Letter signed for today by Nelson Guest so await the response.

 

Daughter just phoned - letter from Wetcolth today stating they are investigating, as she said same as from other DCAs.

 

Hopefully they will now pass back to LTSB. Any bets on who the next DCA is likely to be???

 

Intend

[Bazooka Boo]

Some other powerless circus outfit, nothing to get worried over, if LTSB wanted their money they would ask for it themselves, or use their in house clowns to do it.

[intend]

Cheers BB good to here from you again. Agree with your comments - never that worried as long as LTSB retain ownership of the debt. More I do and read on here the more I have come to believe what you have always said over the 2 years - DCAs are powerless.

 

Intend

[Bazooka Boo]

Very powerless, all they can do is to send out psychological harassment and deforestation, unless they actually own the debt and all the rights to it under the law of property act, then they are as much use as indicators on a submarine.

[Guest]

intend

as bb says, where dca's only act on 'instruction' all they can do in the end is send the matter back to their client with their 'recommendation' which carries no real weight! unless an original creditor then instructs a dca's solicitor (not the dca itself) re legal action (unlikely, unless it is creds own sols as well), then can be ignored if so wish. ie orig cred is on notice re 'dispute'. orig cred would prob either send out again, or try and sell on, or legal action depend on circumstances. up to creditor.

Edited October 9, 2012 by Ford

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Should read NO acknowledgement of liability.

Picky!!!

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

intend

as bb says, dca's only act on 'instruction' and all they can do in the end is send the matter back to their client with their 'recommendation' which carries no real weight! unless an original creditor then instructs a dca's solicitor (not the dca itself) re legal action (unlikely, unless it is creds own sols as well), then all can be ignored if so wish. ie orig cred is on notice re 'dispute'. orig cred would prob either send out again, or try and sell on.

 

It has to be remembered that many DCAs are in fact the collection arms of large debt purchase companies, so one should exercise care as their recommendation to the parent company will have weight.

[Guest]

It has to be remembered that many DCAs are in fact the collection arms of large debt purchase companies, so one should exercise care as their recommendation to the parent company will have weight.

 

yes, if dca is the owner or a 'division' of it. my post there is re where dca doesn't own, as said before.

[intend]

Currently debt still with OC - LTSB - so not so worried. CC debt being collected by LTSB CDR deparment ie in house and as a result quite have to pay afforadable amount. Will need to see if they get greedy on either debt.

 

Again thanks for all the input.

 

Intend

[intend]

Update as on-line - no update - all gone quiet again - so await next DCA or development by LTSB. Will continue to read threads, learn and offer advice {limited compared to the experts) as and when I can. Every time I log on to CAG I feel more powerful in dealing with the situation.

 

Intend

[batman1956]

Picky!!!

 

Sorry Brig but as I read it "now make acknowledgement of the debt" stood out as possibly saying it was being acknowledged I did not intend to come across as picky but we all know that these barstewards will seize any opportunity.

[intend]

Update - couple of letters from LTSB re the loan. first think is a DN - as states required to contact as missed payments. Do note whole of loan is in arrears, with no default or interest being charged.

 

Second letter is a Statement of Account showing same balance as above and an Interest rate of 0%.

 

So nothing changed - and all quiet on the DCA front.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi Intend, can we have a look the ''DN'' please.

[intend]

Hi Brig - will attempt tonight, need to get printer out to send off a SAR for OH. Now we have daughters finances under our control rather than banks/dca, looking to clean up own situation.

 

Cheers

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi Brig - will attempt tonight, need to get printer out to send off a SAR for OH. Now we have daughters finances under our control rather than banks/dca, looking to clean up own situation.

 

Cheers

Sounds like good progress my friend!!!

[intend]

copy of letter i hope

 

[ATTACH]39259[/ATTACH]

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

That's an odd one not a DN nor is it a notice of intention to place a default imo.

 

I'll ask the team to take a llok.

[intend]

Cheers Brig will post up the other letter as well, might shed some light

[Guest]

looks like could be 'notice' as per now s86b consumer credit act?

Edited November 9, 2012 by Ford

[intend]

second letter posted - came at same time

 

Cheers Ford - what is the significance of this - out of my depth here.

[Guest]

if is that section, no worries as such, just the required 'notice', now every 6 mths, even if on a plan, until otherwise. see the section. (shame that they have complied!)

is not a demand for payment as such eg pay up in x days or..., just the required 'notice' of the arrears with request to discuss.

Edited November 10, 2012 by Ford

[dx100uk]

its lloyds version of the required

 

notice of sums in arrears

it is required every 6mts

 

under the new rules of a few years back

 

dx

 

 

dx

[intend]

Cheers all for having a look. Stars clicked.

 

Intend

[intend]

just got copy of CRA for the loan - Experian shows as a settlement date of 30/10/10, account status last updated 07/11/10 balance £0 with a status code0, whilst previous entry was for £7600 with a code of 6

 

Equifax shows current £6900, default sum £7215, default dtae 11/2010 Effective end date 03/11/2010.

 

More confused!!! no payment dates anywhere!!