Jump to content


Notice of Assignment


moonwoman
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4116 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 have seen 'Notice of Assignment' and 'Equitable Assignment' mentioned in a few posts. From what I can remember one post mentioned that the NOA letter must state that the 'DUTIES had been assigned. I have had a Notice which includes the following sentence...

 

'We are writing to notify you that HBOS PLC has assigned all of its respective rights, title and interest in respect of the above referenced account(including the outstanding balance) to Arrow Global Limited, effective 8th October 2010''

 

The letter was post dated 3rd February! Not sure what they were doing between October and February?

 

Dated 4th February I received a letter from Arrow Global stating 'We write to inform you that HBOS PLC has now assigned to Arrow Global Limited the outstanding balance under the above referenced Halifax Credit Card, effective October 2010. Under the terms of this assignment and as defined in the Data Protection Act 1998, Arrow Global Limited is now the data controller of your personal data contained in the records of this account.'

 

Anyway, back to the question - is this a full notice of assignment using this wording? If it isn't, what is it? And what is the difference?

 

Thanks,

 

Moonwoman

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info - I have managed to find the original thread I was referring to which mentions DUTIES and suggests it is important...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?294044-Require-Advice-Please-Dealing-with-BCW&highlight=bcw

 

It's post number 12.

 

So I'm wondering if this is important or not?

 

moonwoman

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info - I have managed to find the original thread I was referring to which mentions DUTIES and suggests it is important...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?294044-Require-Advice-Please-Dealing-with-BCW&highlight=bcw

 

It's post number 12.

 

So I'm wondering if this is important or not?

 

moonwoman

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not site team Vic, but you are right. Without a properly executed NoA there is no cause of action. The NoA should basically say goodbye from creditor 1, we've now sold your debt to Creditor 2 who has been assigned the rights AND DUTIES (important wording) of the debt. You should also get a letter from Creditor 2 saying Hello, we've bought the the debt along with all rights AND DUTIES, so from now on you deal with us.

 

 

No, Tingy is not correct on this.

 

All that it needs to say is something along the lines of:-

 

'We have bought your debt, please start paying us now'

 

As long as it tells you that your debt is now payable to someone else then that is fine. There are some specific situations where they can give incorrect information which invalidates the notice but it is very rare that this happens. From what you wrote in your original post, this situation has not occured.

 

I'm really sorry if this isn't what you hoped to hear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Tingy is not correct on this.

 

All that it needs to say is something along the lines of:-

 

'We have bought your debt, please start paying us now'

 

As long as it tells you that your debt is now payable to someone else then that is fine. There are some specific situations where they can give incorrect information which invalidates the notice but it is very rare that this happens. From what you wrote in your original post, this situation has not occured.

 

I'm really sorry if this isn't what you hoped to hear.

 

i would never pay them , why then when the original creditor sells the debt to these **** dcas it says something why dont they collect! i for one would never pay a **** dca even if i went to court i would tell th judge i will not pay the dca, i would rather go to jail.i would never ever pay a dca!!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi I have seen 'Notice of Assignment' and 'Equitable Assignment' mentioned in a few posts. From what I can remember one post mentioned that the NOA letter must state that the 'DUTIES had been assigned. I have had a Notice which includes the following sentence...

 

'We are writing to notify you that HBOS PLC has assigned all of its respective rights, title and interest in respect of the above referenced account(including the outstanding balance) to Arrow Global Limited, effective 8th October 2010''

 

The letter was post dated 3rd February! Not sure what they were doing between October and February?

 

Dated 4th February I received a letter from Arrow Global stating 'We write to inform you that HBOS PLC has now assigned to Arrow Global Limited the outstanding balance under the above referenced Halifax Credit Card, effective October 2010. Under the terms of this assignment and as defined in the Data Protection Act 1998, Arrow Global Limited is now the data controller of your personal data contained in the records of this account.'

 

Anyway, back to the question - is this a full notice of assignment using this wording? If it isn't, what is it? And what is the difference?

 

Thanks,

 

Moonwoman

 

Hi mooowoman

 

To return to your original and very interesting questions:

 

1. This appears to be an equitable assignment and you could simply ask them using CPUTR and European Credit Directive. Nowhere do they say they have bought the debt.

 

2. The stuff about them now being the Data Controller is nonsense; the DPA relates to your rights about personal data that an organisation holds on you and is not 'transferable'; hence my deduction in 1.

 

3. Where a debt has been sold, you have to be properly served a NOA; and although not a total defence, lack of this might hinder them in their 'cause of action'. This NOA can be served by anyone who claims to have bought your alleged debt but needs to be 'under the hand' of the OC.

 

I should welcome nicklea's take on this.

 

love

 

vic

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicklea, forgive my ignorance on this! does a NOA have to be sent by the OC (or debt purchaser) in a prescribed manner, recorded delivery/signed foe etc?

 

If yes, then if you receive an NOA by snail mail is it better to ignore/lose and hopefully add it to a list of other errors made by the OC in case of litigation. Using my Barclaycard case as an example it would add to a 13 day DN, abject cut & paste CCA with various sections missing etc. Just looking for all the ammunition I can gather!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If yes, then if you receive an NOA by snail mail is it better to ignore/lose and hopefully add it to a list of other errors made by the OC in case of litigation

 

Bingo - you've got it

 

The Act does not specify any particular format and there is also case law that it does not have to come from anybody in particular - it can even come from a third party.

 

The important thing is that if they do not send it by recorded delivery then you can plausibly deny ever receiving it and so they are stuffed if they try to start a court claim against you.

 

However, if you subsequently contact Arrow Global in writing about this you cannot sensibly claim that you haven't received notice - otherwise why would you be writing to them about your debt?

 

The Act actually says that if they send the notice by recorded delivery or leave it at your address in person then it doesn't matter if you get it or not - just as long as they use one of those two routes. However, these companies never do it properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi mooowoman

 

To return to your original and very interesting questions:

 

1. This appears to be an equitable assignment and you could simply ask them using CPUTR and European Credit Directive. Nowhere do they say they have bought the debt.

 

2. The stuff about them now being the Data Controller is nonsense; the DPA relates to your rights about personal data that an organisation holds on you and is not 'transferable'; hence my deduction in 1.

 

3. Where a debt has been sold, you have to be properly served a NOA; and although not a total defence, lack of this might hinder them in their 'cause of action'. This NOA can be served by anyone who claims to have bought your alleged debt but needs to be 'under the hand' of the OC.

 

I should welcome nicklea's take on this.

 

love

 

vic

 

 

Hi Vic,

 

Would you mind if I go over a few of your points. What I am saying is, of course, just my point of view.

 

1. For an absolute assignment to exist there must be a contract in writing between the assignor and assignee - in this case HBOS and Arrow Global - and the debtor must have been given notice in writing. In this case the debtor has been given notice in writing and there is, I presume, a written agreement between the assignor and the assignee and so there is an absolute assignment.

 

If either of these things were missing then it would be an equitable assignment.

 

2. Their rights under this contract have been assigned and the right to process personal data can be assigned as well. However, since Arrow now have these rights that means, I would suggest that HBOS no longer have the right to process your data.

 

3. The written contract needs to be under the hand - that is signed by - the OC but the notice can come from anyone.

 

Regards

 

nicklea

Link to post
Share on other sites

I made a couple of posts earlier but I'm not sure if they showed up as I can't see them

 

I believe one of the site team mentioned in another post that they were having a few problems earlier today.

 

Many thanks for your help re above!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for your input. However. things have now moved on in quite an unexpected way! I had emailed the company yesterday offering to pay a nominal amount as we are on benefits. I also mentioned that there was a possibility that we could borrow to pay it off as a full and final settlement (this would have been around 10% of the o/s amount - and it would have been a non interest, pay back whenever loan from a friend - in order to wrap this up completely) They had replied that their client wouldn't accept anything less than 20 % off the original amount. They also asked for income and expenditure.

 

I replied to the effect that I understood I was not legally obliged to give them income and expenditure info, (I had already told them we were claiming housing and council tax benefits) I also asked them to confirm exactly who 'their client' was.

 

They (BCW) emailed and confirmed that their client was Arrow Global.

 

So far so boring.... however today we received a letter from BCW (dated yesterday) stating...

 

'I can hereby confirm that the above account has been paid in full by a Full and Final settlement figure of £0 on . Our records have been amended accordingly.'

 

I assume either - 1) Someone hit the wrong button on their computer

2) They've given up?

 

I think 1 is more likely, BUT is the letter binding - it is on their headed paper. If they now try and backtrack have I got them, even though it says £0 and no date? Needless to say the letter is a keeper for the file. My plan is to simply wait and see now. What do you think?

 

moonwoman

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Vic,

 

Would you mind if I go over a few of your points. What I am saying is, of course, just my point of view.

 

1. For an absolute assignment to exist there must be a contract in writing between the assignor and assignee - in this case HBOS and Arrow Global - and the debtor must have been given notice in writing. In this case the debtor has been given notice in writing and there is, I presume, a written agreement between the assignor and the assignee and so there is an absolute assignment.

 

If either of these things were missing then it would be an equitable assignment.

 

2. Their rights under this contract have been assigned and the right to process personal data can be assigned as well. However, since Arrow now have these rights that means, I would suggest that HBOS no longer have the right to process your data.

 

3. The written contract needs to be under the hand - that is signed by - the OC but the notice can come from anyone.

 

Regards

 

nicklea

 

Hi nicklea

 

Thanks for responding.

 

I agree save that your 2. assumes an absolute assignment which has not been proven; I follow that we might not wish to invite an answer to this moot point: in any case the old Fat Data Controller is still responsible for personal data held by that company on any individual.

 

Anyway, the OP seems to have solved the problem; so I guess it doesn't matter how many angels can dance on the point of a needle?

 

x

 

v

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi moonwoman

 

Well done. One would have to take what they write at face value since DCAs never tell lies or make mistakes; I'm sure that, on the basis of their reply, your possibility of borrowing has passed away.

 

Enjoy the evening.

 

love

 

vic

 

I must admit I was gob-smacked when I read the letter. It's already in the file stamped 'closed!' I agree - I should take it at face value! Mind you I would quite like to read the follow up letter if they realise that it is a mistake and try to 'change their mind'

 

moonwoman

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi nick

 

I should imagine that it might be an acceptable answer to a DCA on another planet in this or an alternative universe; whether read by it or not.

 

The only thing I know for sure is that I know nothing; some dodgey Greek chap told me this a couple of millennia past.:-)

 

love

 

vic

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just noticed on the letter (sorry - but still so amazed at receiving it I keep reading it in case I've missed something!) it says 'Principal Sum' £amount in here. Does that have any significance - are they likely to come up with a 'Secondary Sum'? Sad how dealing with these people makes you scrutinize everything so suspiciously looking for the catch!

 

moonwoman

 

PS - do you think I should place this in the 'What's the lowest % you've had as a Full & Final Settlement letter' thread - or is that a step too far?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi moonwoman, when my account was assigned to a dca the goodbye letter from the oc just said it had been 'sold'. I pressed the oc to clarify this and they have now stated that the 'rights, title and benefit' were assigned and then went on to say that it was by way of an equitable assignment. No mention of the transfer of duties or obligations as with yourself.

I don't understand why more emphasis isn't placed on ascertaining the true nature of an assignment because as I understand it a dca cannot issue a claim against you in his own name. This does beg the question as to just how far a dca is allowed to go to collect a debt if he only has an equitable assignment?

 

(sorry if my post is duplicated but the first one seems to have disappeared into the ether!)

Edited by antiqued
Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...