Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • just to be clear here..... the DVLA do not send letters if a drivers licence address differs from any car's V5C that shows the same driver as it's registered keeper.
    • sorry she is a private individual, the cars are parking on her land. she can clamp the cars. only firms were outlawed from doing it bazza. thats what the victims of people dumping cars on their drives near airports did and they didn't not get prosecuted.    
    • The DVLA keeps two records of you. One as a driver and one for your car. If they differ you might find out in around a month when they will send you a reminder as well as to your other half for their car. If you receive nothing then you can be fairly sure that you were tailgating though wouldn't explain why they didn't pick up your car on one of drive past their cameras. However even if you do get a PCN later then your situation will not change. The current PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 which is the main law that covers private parking. It doesn't comply for two reasons. 1. Section 9 [2][a] states  (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; The PCN states 47 minutes which are the arrival and departure times not the time you were actually parked. if you subtract the time you took to drive from the entrance. look for a parking place  park in it perhaps having to manoeuvre a couple of times to fit within the lines and unload the children reloading the children getting seat belts on  driving to the exit stopping for cars pedestrians on the way you may well find that the actual time you were parked was quite likely to be around ten minutes over the required time.  Motorists are allowed a MINIMUM of ten minutes Grace period [something that the rogues in the parking industry conveniently forget-the word minimum] . So it could be that you did not overstay. 2] Sectio9 [2][f]  (ii)the creditor does not know both the name of the driver and a current address for service for the driver, the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; Your PCN does not include the words in brackets and in 2a the Act included the word "must". Another fail. What those failures mean is that MET cannot transfer the liability to pay the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable which is why we recommend our members not to appeal. It is so easy to reveal who was driving by saying "when I parked the car" than "when the driver parked the car".  As long as they don't know who was driving they have little chance of winning in court. This is partly because Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. And because anyone with a valid motor insurance policy is able to drive your cars. It is a shame that you are too far away to get photos of the car park signage. It is often poor and quite often the parking rogues lose in Court on their poor signage alone. I hope hat you can now relax and not panic about the PCN. You will receive many letters from Met, their unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors threatening you with ever higher amounts of money. The poor dears have never read the Act which states quite clearly that the maximum sum that can be charged is the amount on the signs. The Act has only been in force for 12 years so it may take a  few more years for the penny to drop.  You can safely ignore everything they send you unless or until they send you a Letter of Claim. Just come back to us if they do send one of those love letters to you and we will advise on a snotty letter to send them. In the meantime go on and enjoy your life. Continue reading other threads and if you do get any worrying letters let us know. 
    • Hopefully the ANPR cameras didn't pick up the two vehicles, but I don't think you're out of the woods just yet. MET's "work" consists of sending out hundreds of these invoices every week so yours might be a few days behind your partner's. There is also the matter of Royal Mail.  I once sold two second-hand books to someone on eBay.  Weirdly the cost of sending them separately was less than the cost of sending them in one parcel.  So to save a few bob I sent them seperately.  One turned up the next day.  One arrived after four days.  They were  sent from the same post office at the same time! But let's hope I'm being too pessimistic. Please update us of any developments.
  • 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

Too much debt to handle...what's next??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4149 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, was just wondering if anyone has sent a hardship letter to their creditor(s) asking for their outstanding debt to be written off and if so, have you been successful or unsuccessful? Are some creditors more than others likely to agree to write the debt off and is there a limit to how much they will write off?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

i will be quite frank and say i have not ever heard of this being successful

 

however it would be wrong to comment without knowing something about he debts you have

 

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

well most of those are good candidates from reclaiming/insurance mis-selling.

 

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

well the op is certainly a candidate for ill health write-offs

would of been nice to know that rather than go hunting for the info..

 

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

You need to read the threads Martin - I think all of mine have been posted up! lol By the way - don't take tht comment seriously, you do a fantastic job!

 

I'm always slightly wary as you never know who reads the threads, and though my illness is 100% real I don't like anyone to feel I'm "using" it. I would honestly rather have my debt back and my health back, but that is not the way my life has panned out. I do mention it in asking people to write off my debt, but use the argument far more that I have no money, no prospect of having any money, so will they consider writing it off please? I have been surprised by the results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Finance U £2500

Welcome £4300

Carlyle Finance £5200

Egg £18000

Motaquote £130

+ several others. Amounts are approximate as I haven't looked up exact amounts, but aren't far off!

 

It's surprising there are so many creditors out there who DO have a heart!! The Egg debt must have been a great relief Tingy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Should DCA's be supplying me with statements of the payments I have made to them since they took the debt off the original creditor? Do I have a right to demand statements even if they don't legally have to supply them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and if they do not, they cannot charge interest (bits below shamelessly nicked from Cerbs or Shadow). Has the account been terminated or sold?

 

 

Consumer Credit Act 2006 Amendment:

 

Section 11 inserts a new section 86D after the new section 86C (inserted into the 1974 Act by section 10). Section 86D sets out the consequences for a creditor or owner if he fails to give a notice as required by sections 86B or 86C. If the creditor or owner fails to provide a notice of sums in arrears when required to do so, then during the period of his failure to provide the notice (i.e. from the date that it was required to be given until the end of the day on which it is eventually provided), he is not entitled to enforce the agreement. In addition, the debtor or hirer is not liable to pay any interest that relates to the period of the creditor or owner’s failure, nor is the debtor or hirer liable to pay any default sum (see the notes in respect of section 18 below) which becomes payable during that period.

 

 

Sums in arrears under running-account credit agreements:

 

86C Notice of sums in arrears under running-account credit agreements

 

(1) This section applies where at any time the following conditions are satisfied—

(a) that the debtor under an applicable agreement is required to have made at least two payments under the agreement before that time;

(b) that the last two payments which he is required to have made before that time have not been made;

© that the creditor has not already been required to give a notice under this section in relation to either of those payments; and

(d) if a judgment has been given in relation to the agreement before that time, that there is no sum still to be paid under the judgment by the debtor.

 

(2)The creditor shall, no later than the end of the period within which he is next required to give a statement under section 78(4) in relation to the agreement, give the debtor a notice under this section.

 

(3) The notice shall include a copy of the current arrears information sheet under section 86A.

 

(4) The notice may be incorporated in a statement or other notice which the creditor gives the debtor in relation to the agreement by virtue of another provision of this Act.

 

(5) The debtor shall have no liability to pay any sum in connection with the preparation or the giving to him of the notice.

 

(6) Regulations may make provision about the form and content of notices under this section.

 

(7) In this section ‘applicable agreement’ means an agreement which—

(a) is a regulated agreement for running-account credit; and

(b) is neither a non-commercial agreement nor a small agreement.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am dealing with several DCA's via a DMP company and none of them have ever supplied statements so I don't know if the amount

they think is outstanding is correct against what I have paid them.

 

All the outstanding balances that the DMP company show are lower than the balances the DCA's show

which is why I would like the DCA's to supply me with statements from the day they took the debt from the original creditor until the present time.

 

None of them are charging interest (yet!) but it's useful to know that they are not allowed to if they don't supply statements.

 

If I send the DCA's a CCA, can I also request statements at the same time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you request it in writing from them (get proof of posting etc) and they dont then they are failing the OFT debt collection guidelines..

 

Section 2.2

 

e. failing to provide debtors or creditors with information on status of debts, for example, not providing requested balance statements when reasonably requested

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you request it in writing from them (get proof of posting etc) and they dont then they are failing the OFT debt collection guidelines..

 

 

 

S.

 

Thanks S.

In that case, I think I will send them CCA first to find out the exact date they took control of the debt and then I will request statements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

After reading a post by one of the CAGgers on here, stating that once a debt has been sold to a DCA then the debtor no longer has to repay the debt because they have no contract with the DCA, only with the debtor, it got me researching on the internet.

 

 

My research has found that It ‘seems’ there IS some kind of law about this which is generally unknown to the public but when put into practice it does actually seem to work.

 

 

Now, I’m certainly not suggesting that everyone with a debt should get it obliterated in this way, nor am I saying that debt avoidance is acceptable but the aforementioned “become debt-free system” does have some valid points, mainly about the way we are treated once we struggle with our debts and how we can fight back.

 

 

I was wondering if any CAGgers have any experience of clearing debts in this way or know of anyone who has?

 

 

I’m really not sure if it is all a [problem] but the main website I have been looking at (which I will not name on this site unless I am allowed to) seems to have a good few claims of successes (although my sceptical side makes me think they could just be fictitional successes!).

 

The website also does not charge to receive all the tools needed to go down this route so may not be a [problem] after all because [problem]s usually involve handing over money. But I still have to remember the old saying “if something seems too good to be true, it probably is!”.

 

 

Then again, you have to wonder if they really are successes....who’s to say the OC will not resurface further down the line to reclaim the debt from the DCA and start the whole process again?? Also, if this method becomes more popular, what’s the chance of the laws being changed so that this method becomes illegal and everyone who has used it ends up in the slammer for fraud??

 

I’d be very interested to hear anyones views/experiences on this.

Edited by citizenB
formatting
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds that like a fantasy site to me. How does the site that you have not mentioned make any money or at least cover its costs ?

 

A DCA if they purchase a debt, can enforce it, as if they were the original creditor. With some very old loans or credit cards, if they can't provide the CCA, it makes it very difficult for them and in many cases they won't bother. From what I understand most DCA's work from spreadsheets and they don't have any of the paperwork from the OC. This is why if you ask for the CCA, they often can't provide it and have to make a request to the OC.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a free man that wanders the world, completely ignorant of the Law of Property Act 1925 (1926?) and it's consequences? Who thinks (mainly due to internet ignorance) that a DCA has purchased a sum of negative equity called "a debt" at a reduced price?

 

Not just purchased the rights to the benefits and duties of that debt under said Act, as is the case in staute?

 

Hmm, not a defence I would rely on...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all for your input. I was looking for the clarification you have given me that this site is a load of tosh (and there are other sites like it too).

My question now is, WHY are sites like them allowed to exist?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My question now is, WHY are sites like them allowed to exist?

 

Same reason as conspiracy theory sites, those that think that an ex TV sports presenter is Jesus and a myriad of other "way out" ideas are allowed. People can have their own sites to express their own opinions on things....some are loony and some are not.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Same reason as conspiracy theory sites, those that think that an ex TV sports presenter is Jesus and a myriad of other "way out" ideas are allowed. People can have their own sites to express their own opinions on things....some are loony and some are not.

 

But I think the sites which tell people they can obliterate debts when they quite clearly can't are far more of a threat to innocent people than those that pose as Jesus....believing some mad ex sports presenter is Jesus can't land you in serious trouble with The Law unlike the sites that tell you how to get your debts cancelled unlawfully.

Have those kind of sites not been investigated or prosecuted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest you could do similar with this entire thread...

 

Bigshoes, WHAT gives you the right to have a go at my post??? We ALL have a right to question things that appear wrong and that's all I was doing!!!!!! Maybe your just jealous over my similar name lol!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigshoes, WHAT gives you the right to have a go at my post??? We ALL have a right to question things that appear wrong and that's all I was doing!!!!!! Maybe your just jealous over my similar name lol!

 

In fact, until Bigshoes...bigsocks put their unwanted tu'pennyworth in, I believed that CAG was a site to be relied on, where it was full of very pleasant people who are extremely generous with their time and free advice. Now, after Bigshoes' intrusion, I am not filled with confidence to post anymore threads in case of being ridiculed. Bigshoes....you are not a member of a lending service by any chance are you???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets calm ths down now.

 

The situation is that when a debt is sold the debt purchaser aquires the rights and obligations of the original creditor as set down in the original terms and conditions

of the account.

 

Big Shoooz, Please be aware there a peoplel who just love to to spout nonsense to get attention ignore them and the site team will deal with them appropriately.

 

Brig.

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...