Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Today , after a lotof years i recieved a letter from this lot. Very friendly, "Were writing to remind you that we havent had any contact from you in a while".  The velvet fist, followed by  a veiled threat to get their preferred debt collectors involved. Yep dead right. In 1992/3 I took out a Student load under duress from DHSS. uP TO 2000 I hadsucessfully gotten deferment on low income. But rarther thansign on as unemployed,I decided to be self employed. I applied and they asked for all sorts of documents. I obliged and then correspondance ceased from them, circa 2001. To date  I have had no correspondance from Student Loans. I was made  redundant in 2009 and  reached 65 in 2012 , at which age the loan should have been cancelled. Now ,today, 12 years on retirement and 11 ( at least years after last contact) I get a letter with veiled threats. Do I , as I smell a scam a) ignore it and hope that Erudio will think that this phishing attempt has failed or b) respond with a statute barred letter or c) remind them of legal terms that loan should be cancelled 12 years ago or d) combination of b) +c)      
    • But I'm not mixing and matching. Sure, when researching I do check multiple avenues, but when speaking, I will open a single post. The Fb post was made in March, it is now June, time has passed, and when the suggestion was made, no further information was given on how I should progress beyond "send a letter", which has meant that I've needed to start another stream - this one, but only after taking the time to research first.
    • hes not turning you away he is simply saying that you should stick to one channel of advice. he is perfectly happy with that channel being this forum, and he will help you   all he is saying, and I agree, is that you should stick to one help channel, not mix and match 3/4
    • As long as we are clear . Do the reading and post your letter of claim in draft form as requested and we can go from there.    
    • Hold on @BankFodder, that was a bit harsh. I spoke with the EVRi complaints Facebook group to begin with, a user on that group told me to send a letter but didn't give any specifics. Here at CAG, I was looking more for specific help as I've never raised such a claim before, and wanted to be sure that my claim was correct, which is why I've researched information with the other groups too, to be sure; but you seem to have assumed that I've made some form of contact with the other groups, such that I find your comments and tone to be very unfair. And I do know a thing or two about forums, that forum users are unpaid volunteers, I happen to be a Tableau Ambassador, and so perform a very similar role helping others in an unpaid capacity  
  • 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

Hillesden Securities Again !!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3364 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

After checking my Noddle report I have a default entry in 2014 from this company

 

I have had no correspondence at all from them before this date or since

 

I was in financial trouble a few years ago and

 

 

the ONLY debt this can refer to was registered as a default in 2007 by the original lender (who I have had no contact with since 2005 )

 

As my credit file was marked with a default on this from 2005-2011

 

 

can a DCA re-register a delinquient debt they have purchased after this amount of time as a default

 

 

presumably on the date they purchased it meaning my credit file is marked again for another 6 years ??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

No, another Default cannot be registered, a default can be registered once and once only.

 

You can write to Hillesden asking for this Default to be removed as it has been applied incorrectly, if they refuse then you can go to the Information Commissioners Office.

 

Be warned though that contacting a DCA will more than likely start collection activities, therefore to help with other posters...

What is the debt for?

When did you make a last payment or write an acknowledgement of the debt?

Do you own your own property?

 

You can also write to the Credit Reference Agencies and place a notice of correction against the default until it is resolved.

 

Stigman

NEVER telephone a DCA

If a DCA rings you, refuse to go through the security questions & hang up!

 

If I have helped you, click on the star & say thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have recently had the same issue with these lovely people with both mine and my wife's CRA files

 

I wrote to them stating the dates the original creditor put the account in default and demanded that they removed all entries relating to the account, after a few 'we're investigating' type letters, they removed it.

 

Note of caution :just in case, put a heading of "I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOU OR ANY RELATED THIRD PARTY"

 

Also when asking for the removal, refer to it as an account, not a debt

 

Hope that helps

omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply

The debt was for an unsecured loan from Welcome finance. £3000 was the default amount which would have been 2007 at the latest (no contact with Welcome or any acknowledgement with a DCA since)

 

 

Hillesden have registered the default April 2014

My understanding was that after 6 years (2013 at latest) the debt and default is statute barred and should have dropped off of my file.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Six years (five in Scotland) is the limitation period for debts, after which they are Statute barred, correct.

 

Default markers on your CRF also have a life of six years before they auto drop off your file, never to return, paid or not.

 

If this is a new entry for the same debt, then they must remove it, first inform the CRA that they are processing inaccurate data and demand it is removed immediately, they more often than not respond with the same lame missive, claiming they have spoken to the DCA and they have told them it is correct and the default will remain.

 

You can place a 'notice of correction' against the entry to advise that it is incorrect.

Then complain to the ICO who should investigate it, the final option is to bring a defamation claim against the DCA in order they remove the inaccurate data, and AFAIK, damages claim start at four figures, rising considerably if you have been refused employment/credit/mortgage due to the inaccurate reporting on your file.

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

Thanks for the replies, As Bazooka Boo correctly stated Hillesden rejected my dispute via the CRA so I have now emailed them direct giving 28 days to respond failing which I will go down the ICO route

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...