Reduced settlement offers?

[jobmid]

It does seem to be a personal prejudice based on there being no apparent reason for people to actually pay the debts they run up. There is a reason why individuals choose to pay their debts - because their credit rating can stop them getting a job, getting a mortgage, getting car finance, or even how companies market to them.

 

Like I said high street banks discount unallocated, unsold debt 3 months after default (normally about 85% of face value). Theres a number of reasons for this, partly theyve already charged it off against tax (so they already got 25% of the debt straight on their profit line), partly because interest on loan contracts is front ended, partly because of charging. But they are all valid reasons to incentivise people to pay up.

 

Many people in financial difficulties arent actually in penury, but their life choices mean they would rather spend 20 quid on drink out than live within their means and pay bills. Thats where incentives come in. And I can assure you, they work.

 

 

Do you work for a DCA?

[victoria_siempre]

Hi guys

 

I do not wish to get caught in cross-fire; however, as a slight aside, I am in penury owing to usury but was told the other day by a high street bank that it was bizarre that they would accept token payments but nothing less than a 50% F&F (which I wasn't offering by the way).

 

x

 

v

[Eduin]

Do you work for a DCA?

 

I work for my own company who sells my services to a DCA. Its a good way to avoid the horrific rate of tax in this country.

[jobmid]

I work for my own company who sells my services to a DCA. Its a good way to avoid the horrific rate of tax in this country.

 

It does seem to be a personal prejudice based on there being no apparent reason for people to actually pay the debts they run up. There is a reason why individuals choose to pay their debts - because their credit rating can stop them getting a job, getting a mortgage, getting car finance, or even how companies market to them.

 

Like I said high street banks discount unallocated, unsold debt 3 months after default (normally about 85% of face value). Theres a number of reasons for this, partly theyve already charged it off against tax (so they already got 25% of the debt straight on their profit line), partly because interest on loan contracts is front ended, partly because of charging. But they are all valid reasons to incentivise people to pay up.

 

Many people in financial difficulties arent actually in penury, but their life choices mean they would rather spend 20 quid on drink out than live within their means and pay bills. Thats where incentives come in. And I can assure you, they work.

 

So you do work for A DCA are you a Door Step Collector?

 

To say most people would rather drink than pay their debts is wrong. I myself lost my job and was reduced to been on benifits instead of having a good living and been financially stable. It was never my intention to avoid paying debts. My prioirtys are put a roof over my head, pay my power bill. pay my gas bill, pay my water and then buy food. I didnt have money after all that for drink or going out i just had enough to cover the basics. I didnt even buy any new clothes I had to live with what I had only only replaced stuff wen it was needed and if i could save up and get clothes. Thats how most people who are in trouble with debt are. Its not a nice life then you got the worry and stress of a DCA sending threating letters and door step collectors around to harass you when really the 60 pounds jobseekes allowance you get each week just doesn't cover the basics. You just worry every day. So you try living that life and then try pass judgment on others.

[dx100uk]

Thats simply not true. a Settlement is offered on almost all defaulted debts in order to resolve it QUICKLY. High street banks offer Settlements as low as 70% on PRIME debt less than 6 months after default in order to 1. get it off their books so they can lend more under their Basle Convention ratios and 2. Incentivise individuals to restore their credit rating. Both of which are good results all round.

 

Don't let your personal prejudices cloud your advice.

 

utter garbage!

 

it does NOT improve your credit rating

it kills it for another 6yrs

partial settlement unless you dictate 'settled' marker only & removal of all negative data

there is no benefit to the punter whatsoever

 

its purely a fleecing excercise and the money goes direct to their pocket to fund further fleecing antics.

 

always said and always will do:

 

if they wont mark as settled and remove ALL neg data - you might as well BURN the money.

 

the quicker this practice is outlawed the better.

 

75% of DCA income is gained by collecting on debts that are NOT OWED.

 

dx

[Fulhamboy]

In response to Eduin, I have been laid off twice in two years, and pior to that I had been paying off my debts regulary for three years. Of course in hindsight I should have not got into debt and will not be able to in the near future. Did you read my first post on this thread ? I said that there are people in genuine hardship and others who like to play games with DCAs, but if the DCA s played fair and did not treat people like crap then this situation would not arise . I am not living at the moment just exsisting. In between looking for work, I spend my time wandering between food stores looking for special offers. by the way how much do you have to live on each week ?

[chattanooga]

While most of what our DCA friend Eduin says is offensive tripe...

 

He is right about OC's offering discounts (presumably to get them off the books).

 

I have two debts with different banks which both have the correct paperwork, no ppi, charges already reclaimed, interest is frozen, show on CRA and are continued to be reported on...yet they offered a reduced settlement (albeit a fairly small one). I didn't take them up on it on the basis that a) I could probably negotiate a better deal myself and b) I couldn't afford it (after all I've got all that alcohol to buy before I think about paying debts).

 

I guess most of the time it's for fleecing reason but it doesn't necessarily HAVE to be.

[citizenB]

It does seem to be a personal prejudice based on there being no apparent reason for people to actually pay the debts they run up. There is a reason why individuals choose to pay their debts - because their credit rating can stop them getting a job, getting a mortgage, getting car finance, or even how companies market to them.

 

Like I said high street banks discount unallocated, unsold debt 3 months after default (normally about 85% of face value). Theres a number of reasons for this, partly theyve already charged it off against tax (so they already got 25% of the debt straight on their profit line), partly because interest on loan contracts is front ended, partly because of charging. But they are all valid reasons to incentivise people to pay up.

 

Many people in financial difficulties arent actually in penury, but their life choices mean they would rather spend 20 quid on drink out than live within their means and pay bills. Thats where incentives come in. And I can assure you, they work.

 

I work for my own company who sells my services to a DCA. Its a good way to avoid the horrific rate of tax in this country.

 

CAG does not condone either debt or TAX avoidance !!

[citizenB]

Another thing to be careful of with these discount offers (if you intend to accept) is that you ensure you receive, in writing, assurances that they will not then sell on the balance to another DCA. It does happen.

[Eduin]

utter garbage!

 

it does NOT improve your credit rating

it kills it for another 6yrs

partial settlement unless you dictate 'settled' marker only & removal of all negative data

there is no benefit to the punter whatsoever

 

There is no difference beteween Settled and Satisified on credit reports and has not been for MANY years. Feel free to check your rating, you will see that the legend for status shows (S) Settled/Satisfied. There is no distinction and moreover as its a closed account, no payment history. I've used this myself, it works. If you expect to have a reasonable sum of cash from a bonus or asset sale, let your debts default and then settle, saving yourself a considerable sum.

 

I find in general the CAG is a good site with decent information but completely misleading advice like your post here don't really help. Thats what I meant by personal prejudices. I can think of all number of reasons not to pay debts and all sorts of reasons to pay them, I'm also good at getting into the mind of other people to understand what their motivations might be. I really have seen it all from debtors with credit cards already defaulted with £32k on them complaining that banks wont lend them £300k to expand brand new (and within 12 months failed) businesses, to the genuine case which is actually quite rare at the stage of DCA placement.

 

You probably wont believe me but the banks REALLY want to comply with the (misguided) OFT guidelines on debt collection, they put the "treating customers fairly" directive before anything else currently - including getting their money back from cheats and theives. I can be pursuing a debt where an individual has taken the banks (and this means in many cases the taxpayer) for £50k, started a business then transferred it into their brother's/wife's/uncle's name and applied to a Debt management company (a fee charger naturally) and I can PROVE they did this deliberately yet my client still expects me to accept their nominal payments through debt management.

 

I should add that if your credit rating does NOT reflect your debt as being Satisfied, then you have a very strong claim with the FSA, again im sure there will be little belief but this sort of thing is actually treated quite seriously *these days* by the banks.

Edited March 23, 2012 by Eduin

[Eduin]

In response to Eduin, I have been laid off twice in two years, and pior to that I had been paying off my debts regulary for three years. Of course in hindsight I should have not got into debt and will not be able to in the near future. Did you read my first post on this thread ? I said that there are people in genuine hardship and others who like to play games with DCAs, but if the DCA s played fair and did not treat people like crap then this situation would not arise . I am not living at the moment just exsisting. In between looking for work, I spend my time wandering between food stores looking for special offers. by the way how much do you have to live on each week ?

 

Really I was just responding to the position of settlement offers and countering an incorrect point which had been made in the thread. How much I have to live off and how much I actually spend are very different but to give you an idea I shop online every 10 days and spend £40 plus £3 delivery for all my food except for the occaisional few pounds in the greengrocers..

[Eduin]

Another thing to be careful of with these discount offers (if you intend to accept) is that you ensure you receive, in writing, assurances that they will not then sell on the balance to another DCA. It does happen.

 

Do you think this happens because someone oppressive company is out to get people or because sometimes, very rarely, people make errors which get corrected? In my experience the very rare example of these cases has been correctly and swiftly resolved. Such practise would be illegal.

[dx100uk]

There is no difference beteween Settled and Satisified on credit reports and has not been for MANY years. Feel free to check your rating, you will see that the legend for status shows (S) Settled/Satisfied. There is no distinction and moreover as its a closed account, no payment history. I've used this myself, it works. If you expect to have a reasonable sum of cash from a bonus or asset sale, let your debts default and then settle, saving yourself a considerable sum.

 

I find in general the CAG is a good site with decent information but completely misleading advice like your post here don't really help. Thats what I meant by personal prejudices. I can think of all number of reasons not to pay debts and all sorts of reasons to pay them, I'm also good at getting into the mind of other people to understand what their motivations might be. I really have seen it all from debtors with credit cards already defaulted with £32k on them complaining that banks wont lend them £300k to expand brand new (and within 12 months failed) businesses, to the genuine case which is actually quite rare at the stage of DCA placement.

 

You probably wont believe me but the banks REALLY want to comply with the (misguided) OFT guidelines on debt collection, they put the "treating customers fairly" directive before anything else currently - including getting their money back from cheats and theives. I can be pursuing a debt where an individual has taken the banks (and this means in many cases the taxpayer) for £50k, started a business then transferred it into their brother's/wife's/uncle's name and applied to a Debt management company (a fee charger naturally) and I can PROVE they did this deliberately yet my client still expects me to accept their nominal payments through debt management.

 

I should add that if your credit rating does NOT reflect your debt as being Satisfied, then you have a very strong claim with the FSA, again im sure there will be little belief but this sort of thing is actually treated quite seriously *these days* by the banks.

SETTLED AND PARTIAL SETTLEMENT THERE IS A BIG DIFF

 

where didd sat/set come from?

 

to single out one example in p'haps 100's is wrong too.

 

dca's fleece people blind

 

75% of their money is made from spoofing people into paying debts they have no legal right to chase.

 

and pocketing the money to fund their next batch offleecing 'victims'

 

end off

 

dx

[Eduin]

SETTLED AND PARTIAL SETTLEMENT THERE IS A BIG DIFF

 

where didd sat/set come from?

 

Settled and Satisfied are the status used on credit reference reports which are replaced today with (S) Settled/Satisfied or just (S) Settled. In any case they never meant that a partial settlement was received - Settled meant resolved without default, Satisfied meant resolved post default. But as an incentive to create payment of debt, these seperated statuses were merged. And this was years ago, well over a decade.

 

dca's fleece people blind

 

75% of their money is made from spoofing people into paying debts they have no legal right to chase.

 

What is your source for this statistic? It smacks of "making stuff up".

[dx100uk]

third time.....

 

PARTIAL SETTLEMENT AND SETTLEMENT....

 

 

dx

[Eduin]

third time.....

 

PARTIAL SETTLEMENT AND SETTLEMENT....

 

 

dx

 

Im getting the impression that Im actually missing your point and i reread the last few posts and still dont see what your meaning. A Settlement is a partial payment to clear the debt and restore a credit file. Paying a balance is called a Payment In Full. Industry standard terms

 

A credit rating does not show in any way whether an account which is Settled/Satisfied was part paid or fully paid, defaulted or not. There is no way to tell from an individuals credit file.

[42man]

I can prove debt collection agencies lie....and I have proof

[Eduin]

I can prove debt collection agencies lie....and I have proof

 

I dont expect anyone would argue that PEOPLE don't lie.

[dx100uk]

Im getting the impression that Im actually missing your point and i reread the last few posts and still dont see what your meaning. A Settlement is a partial payment to clear the debt and restore a credit file. Paying a balance is called a Payment In Full. Industry standard terms

 

A credit rating does not show in any way whether an account which is Settled/Satisfied was part paid or fully paid, defaulted or not. There is no way to tell from an individuals credit file.

 

but every dca states they will only mark the file as partial settlement

thus allowing them to comeback and fleece people further

 

so whats that all about?

 

and indeed i see you are advising on a thread where this is already the case?

 

urm......

 

 

dx

[Fulhamboy]

DCA 'S lie! Thats a bit harsh, they are just being economical with the truth. It has been pointed out on numerous posts that they rely on peoples ignorance of their rights. My final point is that DCAs should try and be a bit more compassionate, use their disgression, instead of shock and awe tactics. There is a big difference between some who is unemployed and struggling to make their payments, and some one who cant make his payments on a £55000 Merc

[Christena]

With reference to my post No 6.

 

I would also like to add further comments on how these fleecers at Link Financial operate.

 

They have added £7000 interest on to a CCJ which legally they cannot collect until the debt has been repaid in full - sometime in the year 2500 I believe! and then would have to go to court to enforce this. I kept on telling them - I only owe you £6000 (less what I have paid todate).

 

They insisted that the CCJ had "expired"

 

After several quotations of this "expired CCJ" I came to realise that what was being said was that the Wrath of Link Financial was about to fall onto my humble self and I was about to be bullied into making larger repayments.

 

I replied saying I have been making repayments as per the courts instructions for the last 12 years and will continue to do so.

 

In effect, I am complying with the law and if I pay more or less than £1.00 per month I would be in contempt of court. They, on the other hand are in contempt of court by trying to make me pay otherwise! but I doubt if they would ever put this on paper.

 

When I offered them £200.00 they said it couldn't be taken as F&F but they could take it against the debt - cheeky beggers!

 

And finally, if the bank that lent me the money in the first place had paid out on the PPI, this situation would never have happened at all.

 

Husband of Christena

[Halibutt]

Well, if they want to change the conditions of the CCJ, they'd have to reapply to the court. After 12 years, it's likely that any such application would be instantly dismissed. If you've kept up with your payments as per court order, there's absolutely nothing else they can do apart from sit grinding their teeth in rage.

[Christena]

I Know This.

 

Hehehe

 

Husband of Christena

[dx100uk]

With reference to my post No 6.

 

I would also like to add further comments on how these fleecers at Link Financial operate.

 

They have added £7000 interest on to a CCJ which legally they cannot collect until the debt has been repaid in full - sometime in the year 2500 I believe! and then would have to go to court to enforce this. I kept on telling them - I only owe you £6000 (less what I have paid todate).

 

They insisted that the CCJ had "expired"

 

After several quotations of this "expired CCJ" I came to realise that what was being said was that the Wrath of Link Financial was about to fall onto my humble self and I was about to be bullied into making larger repayments.

 

I replied saying I have been making repayments as per the courts instructions for the last 12 years and will continue to do so.

 

In effect, I am complying with the law and if I pay more or less than £1.00 per month I would be in contempt of court. They, on the other hand are in contempt of court by trying to make me pay otherwise! but I doubt if they would ever put this on paper.

 

When I offered them £200.00 they said it couldn't be taken as F&F but they could take it against the debt - cheeky beggers!

 

And finally, if the bank that lent me the money in the first place had paid out on the PPI, this situation would never have happened at all.

 

Husband of Christena

 

then get reclaiming it

 

dx

[Eduin]

but every dca states they will only mark the file as partial settlement

thus allowing them to comeback and fleece people further

 

so whats that all about?

 

and indeed i see you are advising on a thread where this is already the case?

 

urm......

 

 

dx

 

There is no such status as "Partially Settled" on any credit file. once it is Defaulted the only ammendment which would be made is that the debt is Settled/Satisfied without any indication of how much was paid to settle the balance.

 

If a partial paytment is accepted as Full and Final Settlement then it is both full (credit rating shows settled) and Final (no further pursuit the remaining balance is voided). It would be illegal to pursue the remaining balance. Im sure there are cases where it has happened but this will be due to human error not deliberate miscreance. Anyone doing such would be shut down VERY fast by the OFT.