Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Unsettling the applecart?,  I'm going to be direct here, I know how this works , I've been in far worse situation than your relative, and I can assure you , now that there i likely a default in her name, it makes absolutely ZERO difference if she pays or not. Denzel Washington in the Equalizer , 'My only regret is that I can't kill you twice'... It's the same with a default, they can only do it once and it stays on your credit file for 6 years if she pays or not, and as it stands right now she's flushing £180 of her hard earned money down the toilet  so that the chaps at Lowell can afford a Christmas party. As for the SAR this is everybody's legal right, originally under the Data Protection act 1998 and now under GDPR, it's her right to find out everything that the original Creditor has on her file, and by not doing it the only person she is doing a massive disservice to is her self. As the father of 2 young adults myself, they need to learn at some point.. right?
    • Thank you for your pointers - much appreciated. dx100uk - Apologies, my request wasn't for super urgent advice and I have limited online access due to my long working hours and caring obligations - the delay in my response doesn't arise in any way from disrespect or ingratitude. I will speak to her at the weekend and see if she will open up a bit more about this, and allow me to submit the subject access request you advise - the original creditor is 118 118 loans and from the letter I saw (which prompted the conversation and the information) the debt collection agency had bought the debt from 118 and were threatening enforcement which is when she has made a payment arrangement with them for an amount of £180 per month. It looks as if she queried matters at the time (so I wonder if I might with the FIO request get access to their investigation file?) - the letter they wrote said "The information that you provided has been carefully considered and reviewed. After all relevant enquiries were made it has been confirmed that there is not enough evidence present to conclusively prove that this application was fraudulent.  However, we have removed the interest as a gesture of goodwill. As a result of the findings, you will be held liable for the capital amount on the loan on the basis of the information found during the investigation and you will be pursued for repayment of the loan agreement executed on 2.11.2022 in accordance with Consumer Credit Act 1974"  The amount at that time was over £3600 in arrears, as no payments had been made on it since inception and I think she only found out about it when a default notice came in paper form. I'm a little reluctant to advise her to just stop paying, and would like to be able to form a view in relation to her position and options before unsetting the applecart - do you think this is reasonable? She is young and inexperienced with these things and getting into this situation has brought about a lot of shame regarding inability to sort things out/stand up for herself, which is one of the reasons I have only found out about this considerably later Thank you once again for your advice - it is very much appreciated.    
    • That's fine - I'm quite happy to attend court if necessary. The question was phrased in such a way that had I declined the 'consideration on the papers' option, I would have had to explain why I didn't think such consideration was appropriate, and since P2G appear to be relying on a single (arguably flawed) issue, I thought it might result in a speedier determination.
    • it was ordered in the retailers store  but your theory isnt relevant anyway, even if it fitted the case... the furniture is unfit for purpose within 30 days so consumer rights act overwrites any need to use 14 days contract law you refer too. dx  
    • Summary of the day from the Times. I wasn't watching for a couple of interesting bits like catching herself out with her own email. Post Office inquiry: Paula Vennells caught out by her own email — watch live ARCHIVE.PH archived 23 May 2024 11:57:02 UTC  
  • 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

Creation Finance have moved Defaulted Date


Taz11
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2783 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

Thanks Silverfox,

 

I'll take a look for the file they sent, and if its not available I'll SAR. Much appreciated. I'll let you know ;) and feedback.

Regards

 

Sorry, by CRA, do you mean a credit referance agency, equifax, experian etc... or the original debtor ?

 

thnx

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes, Credit Reference Agency. The original creditor would (should) also have this information so if you're feeling cash rich, you could SAR them too

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

old thread merged

DN post 10 help

 

 

think it will..

send them a copy:lol:

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

thanks dx100uk,

 

I obviously have the original of that default ( as I scanned it for that post ) as I filed everything, and it will show all the original details :)

 

How do I go about putting this in a letter now to Creation, stating that the default has been moved from the original date on the default notice !!!!. I can't wait to send this letter :)

 

@gwebstech, I heard nothing, and the letter from creation proves they have no cca ;)

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

old thread merged

DN post 10 help

 

 

think it will..

send them a copy:lol:

 

Game, set and match

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no, I didn't get a reply, no CCJ or further correspondence.

 

How do I now put this in writing to Creation or do I go straight to the ICO as I have proof of the original default notice ?

Thank you :)

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

simply send them a letter with a copy of that DN

demanding that they correct the CRA file entries

give them 14 days

or you will raise a complaint with the ICO

 

 

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

Thanks dx100uk,

 

I'm getting on to it. Will keep thread updated. G'night ppl, much appreciated. ;)

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Ok, sorry people,

this had taken a back seat as it was the last one on my list,

and I had to try and find ( amongst numerous boxes ) the original default.

 

 

I've now found it and it was definitely dated the 6th January 2009 with the same account number that is on the CRA'S which had been renewed on the 8th June 2016 at my old address.!!!!!

 

This is my letter to Creation, would/could you please advise if this is ok, and I'll send it recorded delivery.

 

Creation Finance Limited

Chadwick House

Blenheim Court

Solihull

West Midlands

B91 2AA.

 

October 10, 2016

 

Mr *******

*******

*******

*******

*******

 

Account Number : ****************

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I formely request with immediate effect, that you remove the above account from all Credit Reference Agencies. You will note from your own correspondence, that the default was issued on the 6th January 2009. ( Copy Enclosed )This, in effect would remain on the credit reference agency files for 6 years until 6th January 2015, and then be removed.

 

The default has been logged again on the 8th June 2016 at an address I have not been living at for the past 4 years.

I believe this action is frowned upon by the Information Commissioners Office and if you choose to ignore my request to remove the account, I will initiate action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, and The Financial Ombudsman, and providing said authorities with the original Default Notice provided by yourselves.

 

Please comply within 14 days with my request and advise me accordingly in writing that the account has been removed from all Credit Reference Agencies.

Sincerely,

 

Mr *******

 

Any advice appreciated, Thanks Taz

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

please/request/ ..no .you demand..

 

 

else you'll seek compensation

you complain to the ICO

remove the rest

makes you sound like you don't know what you are talking about if you list uncle tom cobbly and all.

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

Any better ?, thanks

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I demand with immediate effect, that you remove the above account from all Credit Reference Agencies. You will note from your own correspondence, that the default was issued on the 6th January 2009. ( Copy Enclosed )This, in effect would remain on the credit reference agency files for 6 years until 6th January 2015, and then be removed.

 

The default has been logged again on the 8th June 2016 at an address I have not been living at for the past 4 years.

I believe this action is frowned upon by the Information Commissioners Office and if you choose to ignore my demand to remove the account, I will seek compensation,forward the original default notice, and file a report with the Information Commissioners Office.

Comply within 14 days of receipt of this letter with my demand and advise me accordingly in writing that the account has been removed from all Credit Reference Agencies.

Sincerely,

 

Mr *******

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having rather embarrassingly been refused credit by a leading financial institution recently

I was advised to consult my credit file.

 

 

I was disturbed to find yourselves - Creation Finance have amended an original default registered in jan 2009

to a new date of 08/05/2013 Thus placing an account back on my credit file when it had already fallen off.

 

I am advised by information from the ICO to write to you giving you 14 days to removed the new default

and thus the account as the debt has already been originally defaulted more than 6yrs ago.

 

 

Should you fail to do so I will invoke a complaint with the ICO

seeking a suitable financial redress for the inconvenience and distress caused by your unlawful actions.

 

 

yours

 

 

 

 

For your reference I enclosed a copy of the original default notice.

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

Thanks for that, short and sweet is the best way to go.............made mine look like an essay. Really appreciate your input. Copied and pasted and will be winging its way to creation. Will let you know ;)

 

Thanks again,

 

Taz :)

Taz11 v NatWest/Triton: Unenforceable :D

Taz11 v BOS: Unenforceable :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...