Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Firstly, I would like to thank everyone for their help in this matter. Since my last post I have received a reply from Plymouth Council Insurance Team concerning my wife’s accident (please see enclosed letter and photo of the offending Badminton post) which they deny any responsibility for the said accident. I feel that the Council is in breach of their statutory duties under the following acts: The Leisure Centre was negligent in its duty of care and therefore, in breach of the statutory duty owed under section 2 of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (the Act) to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all their employees, and others who might be affected by its undertaking, e.g. members of the public visiting the Leisure Centre to use the facilities. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 that requires employers to assess risks (including slip and trip risks) and, where necessary, take action to address them. The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) require the risk to people’s health and safety from equipment that is used at a Leisure Centre be prevented or controlled. I would like some advice to see if my assumptions are correct and my approach to obtaining satisfactory outcome to this matter are accurate. Many thanks   PLM23000150 - Copy Correspondence.pdf post docx.docx
    • Talking to them does not reset the time limit, although they will probably tell you it does, they'd be lying. Dumbdales are the in-house sols for Lowlife, just the next desk along. If Lowlifes were corresponding with you at your current address then Dumbdales know your address. However, knowing that they are lower than a snake's belly, you would be well advised to send them a letter, informing them of your current address and nothing else. Get 'proof of posting' which is free from the PO counter, don't sign it, simply type your name. That way then they have absolutely no excuse for attempting a back door CCJ.   P.S. Best course of action, IGNORE them, until or unless you get a claim form......you won't.
    • A 'signed for' Letter of Claim has been sent today so they have 14 days from tomorrow... Lets wait and see what happens but i suspect judging by their attitude they wont reply 
    • I am extremely apprehensive about burning our files.... I do not know why, so it is becoming an endless feedback loop. Scared to pull the trigger to speak in the desire not to mess up my file. 
    • Hi All, So brief outline. I have Natwest CC debt £8k last payment i made was 7th November 2018 Not a penny since. So coming up to the 6 year mark. Can't remember when i took out the  credit card would be a few years before everythign hit the fan. Moved house 2020 - updated NatWest as I still have a current account with them. Then Lowells took over from Moorcroft and were writing to me at my current address. I did get a family member to speak to them 3 years ago regarding the debt explained although it may be in my name I didn't rack it up then went contact again. 29th may received an email from overdales saying they were now managing the debt. I have not had any letter yet which i thought is odd?  Couple of questions 1. Does my family member speaking to lowell restart statute barred clock? 2. Do you think overdales aren't writing to me because they will back door CCJ to old address even though Lowells have contacted me at current address never at previous? ( have no proof though stupidly binned all letters  ) Should I write to them and confirm my address just incase? Does this restart statute barred clock? 3. what do you think best course of action is?   Any help/advice is appreciated I am aware they may ramp up the process now due to 7th December being the 6 year mark.   Many Thanks in advance! The threads on here have been super helpful to read.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Can a DCA charge interest?


hatesdebt
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4496 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

Opinions seem to vary on this and despite some serious googling and even a few searches on here, there seems to be nothing which is actually definitive.

 

If the dca does NOT own the debt, it seems they cannot add interest.

If they DO own the debt, the general opinion is that they can only charge it, if the original agreement has the provision to do so, if sold on to a third party (and generally) the agreements don't.

 

This seems to be a common question asked and with idiots like Cabot charging 12%, I think it's vitally important to have a definitive answer to this.

 

Do you guys agree?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

If a debt has been sold with all the rights benefits

and obligations of the original agreement if the terms

and conditions of the original agreement allow for interest

to be charged then it can be so charged at the rate specified

in the agreement.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

.....Not withstanding the fact that many people will receive a DN (some compliant and some not), but NEVER receive a TN?

Although, I know some (inc me) that receive a letter from the OC saying you've done this / that / defaulted etc and a load of other blurb, with a line added "we have terminated the agreement" (which is not a proper TN, No?)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Brig,

 

But this is where you have the confusion arising. There are others that say interest can only be charged if the original agreement has that provision if the debt is sold on?

 

If it is not stated in the agreement then they can not charge it.

If it is in the agreement then they can only charge the amount stated in the agreement, unless you have recieved a prior variation to the agreement. (They must provide evidence if an agreement has been varied - and they can only charge you from the date they notify you).

 

Regardless of the above If a DCA buys an agreement they can only charge interest from the date that you are notified of the assignment.

 

Any company who charges, and claims interest, to which it is not entitled is commiting an act of fraud and should be reported to the OFT immediatley.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to throw another spanner in the works.....as usual!

 

I am of the opinion that....

My agreement is with the OC, if I default and it is passed onto another third party, who then demands full and immediate payment, then that original agreement is now dead.

 

Therefore, I am only liable for the amount up to the time I was asked for full payment, once that happened, then no further interest or charges can be applied as the original agreement no longer exists....

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading this Tread, I thought I would recheck my 3 Cabot Accts. One of them is charging interest.

Cabots balance Dec 2006 was £3,418.32

Now the balance is £4748.91

No mention of interest charged, waiting for CCA from them, just sent dispute letter.

Interesting read though Bazooka Boo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

surely............

 

if the agreement has been terminated by anyone [typically the OC] then no int can be charged by anyone as the agreement and its T&C's are no longer in-force.

 

a 'buyer' cannot automatically or by default assume any rights to charge anything let alone interest.

 

as stated this is fraud, any agreement they 'assume' is in force has not been signed by the payee.

 

dx

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

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

surely............

 

if the agreement has been terminated by anyone [typically the OC] then no int can be charged by anyone as the agreement and its T&C's are no longer in-force.

 

a 'buyer' cannot automatically or by default assume any rights to charge anything let alone interest.

 

as stated this is fraud, any agreement they 'assume' is in force has not been signed by the payee.

 

dx

 

Hi,

 

Ok...i have another few questions....

 

1) Is it not best then to just let the original creditor sell it on...then SAR for final balance....which is what is owed....and sit and wait?

 

2) Can the final balance via this be used in a court of law if it ever does get to a court case...hence the 'new owners' are taking you to court for final balance and illegally added charges....? So part of the defence is that this is a hiked up balance..not the real balance.

 

3) I'm not advocating to evade...i just think ultimately...if my girlfriends creditors ( which are few and not for a lot of money ) say 'bugger off' effectively...and it gets to the £1 a month stage ( it's started as £5 a month of which i will be paying ) and she's not got back on her feet....best to just leave it at that and wait...at the £1 a month part.If it goes to court then she has been paying...and it is then them that are being unreasonable...( thanks bazooka for the £5 starting tip ).

 

4) If it does get sold on...and you continue with your payments with new 'owner' ( ****** ) and they have no rights to add illegal charges...then you are reducing the debt....( in theory ).

 

Feedback appreciated..as always.

 

Regards,

Stormski

Edited by stormski
Another question
Link to post
Share on other sites

A shameless bump for some more feedback...

 

Thanks for all the input so far.

 

The problem as I see it...

 

A dca buys a debt for lets say £1k, which has a face value of £10k.

They are only out of pocket by £1k, so they are charging you interest on £9k which they never lent to you!! - shameful!

 

Something definitive would be great, as we would then be able to tackle these **** with their "unlawful" charges. Not only that, there could be a huge influx of complains going off to the oft, which is always a good thing against these companies.

 

Thanks all

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can IMHO can only charge interest after the purchase of the debt

if the original agreement specifies that it can be charged.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The purpose of this forum is to

help others not to show that you

can quote sections of acts of Parliament

without explaining it to the person

seeking advice, to do this is pointless.

BTW I know it you pointed the OP to the

section of CCA 2006 the least you can do

is explain it to them.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...