Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just wanted to report that the court dropped the MS90 and she ended up with 3 points, £40 fine, £30 Victim Sur (?) and £80 court costs.....thing is because she rang her ins to be honest and inform what was happening they cancelled her policy there and then charging her £50 to do it and now she’s gone to reinstate her insurance has gone thru the roof as she’s had a cancelled policy!!  Seems a bit unfair, we hoped dropping the MS90 would avoid this - does this sound right?    Thankyou  
    • I'm removing two posts here – one because it refers to "… All from the same ethnic background" and the second one referring to the fact that the customer was Spanish. The first, particularly by king12345 has a strong racist tone about it and is completely unwelcome here.  king1 2345 has been here long enough and knows very well that this is not what we do. ==============================================================================   In terms of the building and insurance problem, it certainly sounds if you are being treated very badly and we would be very happy to help. Unfortunately I find your story is rather unclear – probably because there is a lot of narrative and I'd be grateful if you could clarify your story and in particular breaking down the insurance job and the rest including giving their values. Do you know if the insurance money has been paid to the customer or is the insurance company simply waiting for some kind of approval. You say that the insurance company has signed the job off and so this suggests to me that they are satisfied but what worries me is that they may already have paid the money to the customer who is merely withholding it from you rather than authorising the direct payment of the insurance money to you. Your story needs substantial clarification please. Finally, does your customer own the property? If you are not sure then you should consult the land registry website to ascertain the owner of the property
    • update:  Tried with new micro filter and still no difference in the speeds.  Called plusnet and they sent this 🤪 although looks like there was interference in the line which i never picked up   
    • Hi dx100uk   He is the information you asked for.   OC: Capital One    Type of debt: Credit Card    When taken out: 29/10/2017   Current owner: Capital One    Defaulted date: Hasn’t Defaulted    Outstanding sum: £156.52   ———————————————————————   OC: Vanquis   Type of debt: Credit Card    When taken out: 21/05/2018   Current owner: Vanquis   Defaulted date: 31/05/2019   Outstanding sum: £355.00   ———————————————————————   OC: Ocean    Type of debt: Credit Card    When taken out: 09/09/2018   Current owner: Ocean   Defaulted date: 07/06/2019   Outstanding sum: £318.00   ———————————————————————   OC: Instant Cash Loans T/A Payday Express   Type of debt: Payday Loan   When taken out: 22/01/2014   Current owner: Instant Cash Loans T/A Payday Express   Defaulted date: 04/06/2014   Outstanding sum: £492.00   ———————————————————————   OC: NatWest   Type of debt: Current Account    When taken out: 05/08/2003   Current owner: NatWest   Defaulted date: 30/04/2016   Outstanding sum: £468.00   ———————————————————————   OC: British Gas   Type of debt: Utility Gas Account   When taken out: 01/08/2015   Current owner: British Gas   Defaulted date: 06/09/2018   Outstanding sum: £712.00   ———————————————————————   OC: British Gas   Type of debt: Utility Electric Account   When taken out: 01/08/2015   Current owner: British Gas   Defaulted date: 06/09/2018   Outstanding sum: £819.00
    • Thanks DX re counterclaim. Just to clarify regarding witness should I just put one on the N180 and at court just take a witness statement from partner?  
  • Our picks

timid80

Natwest debt / SAR / CCA advise

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1310 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

First post, so hoping I've followed all the recommendations.

 

Would appreciate some advice following a recent SAR request I sent to NatWest.

 

Used the template from the CAG library to send a SAR to NatWest and they've called today to ask exactly what I was looking for.

 

Not very good at being forceful on the phone, so rather than saying "everything I asked for in writing", I explained I needed transactions and credit agreements.

 

They are supposed to send me a list of transactions for all of my accounts that I will then comb through for any reclaimable charges and supply me details of the department that may be able to locate my agreements. They are also sending back the £10 fee.

 

I have the following defaulted from Natwest (all have fallen off my credit report in the last 2 years). Fell into problems in 2009 and have been making token payements on and off since:

  • a non SB unsecured loan (post April 2007) - £16k outstanding
  • Overdraft - £304 outstanding
  • Credit Card (pre April 2007) - £3k outstanding

 

Just wondering if I should have demanded more or if transactions and an attempt to find my agreements is a good start. Have just started to tidy up the mess from numerous debts. Natwest is the most complicated, largest amount I owe and surprisingly haven't chased, just send statements. They have used DCA in the past but seem to still own the debts

 

Can anyone advise.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RBS Group havent been to debt sale in a while which is probably why they "Own" and not "Sell" the accounts. That may change in the future.

Anyway back to point. This is standard process from RBSgroup and IMHO I think its a good stance to take.

 

If they are sending you £10 and you need anything else in future, then just resend for another SAR Request.

 

Oh and by the way, Welcome to CAG Timid80, good to have you here.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds good, thanks for the info. Have been reading forum for months, chuffed I haven't messed the process up yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds good, thanks for the info. Have been reading forum for months, chuffed I haven't messed the process up yet.

 

Well youve done well so far. If Natwest forget something out of what you've requested (After being revised) then you can get back onto them. But generally Speaking RBSgroup are normally pretty good with this stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have received a response to a CCA I sent to Natwest (attached), would appreciate some advise as to how to proceed.

 

Details of debt

Original Creditor: Natwest

Current Creditor: Natwest

Date Opened: 15th June 2008

Default date: Sept 2009

Opening balance: £18k (£28k according to old credit report from 2014?)

Current balance: £15k

Last payment: March 2015

DCA: Robinson Way, but no recent letters received.

 

QUESTION - Response from Natwest states that the loan agreement will have been destroyed. As the debt is post 2007, I'm not sure if this means it is enforceable or not?

 

They have also stated that I had PPI on the loan.

 

QUESTION - Not expecting to receive any cash-back from this one but wondering if anyone would recommend claiming back the PPI to reduce the balance of the outstanding amount?

 

Thanks for reading

Natwest CCA response (redacted).pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sold, most recent statement I have is on Natwest headed paper (addressed from their CMS Recoveries Branch), but my last arrangement to pay was via Robinson Way, so think RW were only providing collection services.

So even though I opened the account after 2007, no agreement, no enforcement - am I getting that right? Would claiming for PPI then make it enforceable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Natwest don't know their left from right!

 

They say that they destroy these docs six years AFTER the final payment/account closed, which is correct, but as the account was closed on the 15th June last year, then they have openly admitted falling foul of the money laundering regs, however I wouldn't be telling them their obvious mistake! Let them dig their own grave.

 

I would certainly be reclaiming that PPI, 5k for their trouble!


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!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Natwest don't know their left from right!

 

They say that they destroy these docs six years AFTER the final payment/account closed, which is correct, but as the account was closed on the 15th June last year, then they have openly admitted falling foul of the money laundering regs, however I wouldn't be telling them their obvious mistake! Let them dig their own grave.

 

I would certainly be reclaiming that PPI, 5k for their trouble!

 

My thoughts exactly. Not planning to make them aware they can't read a calendar but will take a look at the PPI, if the account's closed guessing they'd struggle to keep anything that's due back!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If they cant find the agreement, they cant enforce in court :)

This is a good thing. Has the balance been sold to Robinson Way on a permanent basis?

 

why can't they enforce?


An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because without it, how are they going to convince a judge?


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!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because without it, how are they going to convince a judge?

 

Loan account statements proving the borrower received the funds etc.


An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Loan account statements proving the borrower received the funds etc.

 

My understanding is that it isn't whether they can prove the funds were received. The enforceability of the debt relates to the terms of the agreement and the relevant law at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Loan account statements proving the borrower received the funds etc.

 

Still need the original agreement.


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!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Still need the original agreement.

 

Can you post the section of CPR or relevant case law and/or statute that confirms a prerequisite for enforcement is sight of the original.


An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have unapproved certain posts here as it doesnt help the OP - However for reference - This may help

 

 

Court Decides Credit Card Debt Was Unfair

 

A Manchester man has had a £13,000 credit card debt wiped out thanks to a leading North West law firm.

 

Stephensons Solicitors LLP has just won a County Court case for a client who found himself in debt after taking out a credit card.

 

Mr Traynor initially took out the credit card when he was approached in Sainsburys supermarket seven years ago. He completed and signed an application form in store and received his card a few days later through the post.

 

In late 2005, his business was not doing well and he began to struggle with the repayments. His credit limit had been continually increased without him requesting it and with interest and late payment fees mounting up, his debt had risen to more than £10,000 by April 2006.

 

Mr Traynor said: “After failing to make my minimum monthly payments I was regularly contacted by my credit card provider. I tried to explain that hopefully I would be able to make repayments if my income increased. In September 2006, I started making nominal repayments of £1 per month”.

 

However, Phoenix Recoveries (UK) Limited later acquired the debt and in February 2008 they issued a County Court claim to recover the outstanding amount – which by now had reached £13,223.67.

 

Sarah Hood, a consumer solicitor at North West law firm Stephensons Solicitors LLP, successfully defended the client against the claim after it was discovered that he not been supplied with what are known as ‘prescribed terms’ when he first took out the card.

 

Before the trial, Phoenix produced one further document which contained the prescribed terms, but it was not signed by Mr Traynor and was clearly not provided to him back in 2002. The Court agreed the agreement was unenforceable and ordered Phoenix to pay his legal costs.

 

Sarah Hood said: “Often credit card companies are unable to produce a credit card agreement or other document signed by the debtor containing the prescribed terms, such as a credit limit or a sentence indicating that the credit card company will decide this limit from time to time.

 

“Most requests for a copy of the agreement result in the disclosure of a signed application form that does not comply with the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

“If you entered into a credit card agreement before April 6th 2007 and your credit card company cannot produce a signed document containing the prescribed terms, then there is an argument that they cannot enforce the agreement.”

 

Each case has to be considered on its own merits but this case illustrates that defending a county court claim in relation to a credit card debt can have a positive outcome.

 

Liam Waine, partner and head of the consumer contract department at Stephensons added: “Many people may consider this result to be unfair against the credit card company but the rules governing the content of credit agreements are inflexible and designed to protect the consumer. It’s the responsibility of the creditor to ensure they comply. The onus is on them to provide an enforceable document if they are hoping to obtain a county court judgment against a consumer who has failed to meet the repayments.”

 

Mr Traynor said: “I am extremely grateful to Stephensons for helping me win this case and getting the credit agreement made unenforceable in a court of law. It is a great weight off my shoulders.”

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...