Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Interestingly I've just had another alert on my Clear Score report:   Upcoming Updates A new credit or store card will be added to your January report. Organisation Name: BAIA0090 Account Number: ****9048 Company Type: finance house What does this mean? This could mean that you’ve recently opened a new account, or it might be because a lender has just shared some information relating to an old account. Why is this change not on my report yet? We get your credit report every month from Equifax, a credit reference agency. This update can be seen on your Equifax credit report now but will only be reflected in your ClearScore report when your report is next updated, which is on 2 January. If you apply for credit now, lenders will see this update on your Equifax credit report. Now, this looks very much as if Hoist have taken my agreement off and transferred it to whoever BAIA0090 are.  I've not seen any new notice of assignement or anything.  
    • Sorry i am Not putting details in here.This bank i did have an account with in 1993.That is the last time i used them. I am going to let them ccj me. I am not going to even think about this any more.My bin will get the letters and my door will be ignored. Thank you for the interest but i will waste these #Ankers time for another 6 odd years while i get my mind right All the best
    • Particulars of Claim (for Reference - not to be submitted with defence)   What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? 1.The Claim is for the sum of £2722 arising from the Defendant's breach of a regulated consumer credit agreement referenced Under no xxxxxxxxxxxx   2.The Defendant has failed to remedy the breach in accordance with a Default Notice issued pursuant to ss.87(1) and 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.   3.The Claimant claims the sums due from the Defendant following the legal assignment of the agreement from Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd (EX BARCLAYCARD) Written notice of the assignment has been given. The Claimant claims 1.The sum of £2792 2. Costs Defence   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   2.The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is denied. Whilst I have had dealings with Barclaycard  in the past I cannot recall the specifics of the alleged agreement.   4. Paragraph 2 is denied .I have no knowledge of who the claimant is nor have I been provided with any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.   5.Paragraph 3  is denied.I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor or Legal Assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars of claim .   6. It is denied that any amounts are due under any agreement.   7. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Howard Cohen & Co Solicitors by way of a CPR 31:14 request sent via 1st class recorded post on 19/11/2019.Further to the above I sent Hoist Finance UK Holdings 3 LTD a section 78 request via 1st class recorded post on 19/11/2019.  To date, neither Howard Cohen nor Hoist Portfolio are yet to furnish me with the requested information .   8.Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to   a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; c) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to Sec 87 (1) CCA1974. d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   9. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   10. On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974.6.   By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. (Defence mainly taken straight from Micky the Hippo's similar defence)
    • On the MCOL site. I hadn't submitted the defence, but it was mostly filled in. I just left it on. I'll submit it by 15:00 today unless I hear otherwise. 
    • The letter from Drydens is asking me to respond to their letter:   "we will have no alternative but to apply to the Court to lift the stay on the proceedings in order to progress the legal action commenced against you."   Obviously I don't want to ignore it. 
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 867 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

Gone into administration.

 

When the FCA banned them from operating as a Payday Lender, they also ordered CFO to redress customers who had been unfairly treated.

 

Today, they have gone into administration, with emails from the administrator stating the actual figure owed to the individuals, but it won't be paid.

 

:!:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wont it be paid? I got an email saying i was owed a poxy £40 which is nowhere near what i think they shoukd owe me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got it as well - into administration at virtually the start of the new tax year: all that talk about redress and now there's nay money in the pot! Bye bye 125.50 :evil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why wont it be paid? I got an email saying i was owed a poxy £40 which is nowhere near what i think they shoukd owe me

 

Because their creditors get first pick, and anything left is then distributed between everyone else.


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just curious as to why the 34 million redress package was even agreed with the FCA, in the absence of any reasonableness that they'd be able to honour it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CFO Lending Have Entered Administration Today

 

CFO Lending

CFO Lending Limited – In Administration

 

We, Paul Boyle and David Clements of Harrisons Business Recovery and Insolvency Limited, were appointed Joint Administrators of CFO Lending Limited (‘the Company’) on 6 April 2017 at 11.40am The appointment was made by the directors of the Company pursuant to Paragraph 22 of Schedule B1 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and was filed at The High Court of Justice Leeds District Registry.

 

We can confirm that the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has consented to our appointment as Administrators. The purpose of this document is to provide clients and creditors with an outline of the current position, to explain what we intend to do as regards the Administration and provide details of what information we require.

 

Our role as Joint Administrators is two-fold. The first objective is to protect the interests of creditors generally, including consumer creditors. Second, we wish to maximise realisations from the assets of the Company, which may assist towards achieving the first objective. We can confirm that we are working closely with the FCA to achieve both of these objectives and will to do so.

 

The principal asset in this Administration relates to the outstanding loans repayable to the Company (the Loan Book) from consumer borrowers. The Company offered two types of loan: ones often described as ‘payday’ loans and, to a smaller extent, guaranteed loans.

 

Harrisons are the Administrators - Keep an eye on this one ladies and gents.

 

Link To Article


**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can send a copy if someo e can tell me how to do it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Click on the "Forward email" box in your email program and send it to: admin@consumeractiongroup.co.uk


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

Quote
No... you can't eat my brain just yet. I need it a little while longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no spaces!!


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guys

 

Can someone send a copy of the email to admin... This is important.

 

Ive forwarded a copy of the email now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just curious as to why the 34 million redress package was even agreed with the FCA, in the absence of any reasonableness that they'd be able to honour it.

 

Most of the £34 million was write offs. I think they had to actually pay about £2.7 million in redress. Knowing what a bunch of snakes these people are I thought there would have been checks to make sure they had the money and that the money was ring fenced.

 

I always wondered what the incentive was for these guys to do the right thing as they were no longer actually making money from this business. With companies like Wonga and Sunny it makes sense to pay as they are still in the game. These guys have no doubt been taking monies out of the company in recent months in one form or another with the clear intention of going into administration in April. The FCA have known for at least a month CFO have not been making payments when due and fobbing people off with weak excuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why wont it be paid? I got an email saying i was owed a poxy £40 which is nowhere near what i think they shoukd owe me

 

It states this under the value of what you were owed -

 

Unfortunately, we do not currently envisage that there will be sufficient funds to enable the payment of a dividend in respect of your claim in these proceedings. We would, however, urge you to periodically review our website for updates in case that position changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So it looks like I can say goodbye to the £820 that they say I am owed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps CFO had every intention of making the redress payments (and maybe still will). It is almost certain that since the announcement and the headline £34m figure hitting the press they have had a huge surge in claims for unafordable lending. People would would have been due a payment of £40 or £50 pounds under the redress scheme may well have been due a payment of £1k or £2k if they made a complaint and that was upheld. Clearly compensation in these claims will never be paid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried ringing that administrator but I am just getting music I am so annoyed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been told that the administrator has till June to let us know what will happen. I have resigned myself to not getting any payment but am annoyed that this has been allowed to happen and why has the FCA not made sure that we got paid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been told that the administrator has till June to let us know what will happen. I have resigned myself to not getting any payment but am annoyed that this has been allowed to happen and why has the FCA not made sure that we got paid

 

Was your payment part of the redress scheme or a separate complaint made by you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was your payment part of the redress scheme or a separate complaint made by you

 

Part of redress .scheme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe a daft question but can the fscs help in this situation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most of the £34 million was write offs. I think they had to actually pay about £2.7 million in redress. Knowing what a bunch of snakes these people are I thought there would have been checks to make sure they had the money and that the money was ring fenced.

 

I always wondered what the incentive was for these guys to do the right thing as they were no longer actually making money from this business. With companies like Wonga and Sunny it makes sense to pay as they are still in the game. These guys have no doubt been taking monies out of the company in recent months in one form or another with the clear intention of going into administration in April. The FCA have known for at least a month CFO have not been making payments when due and fobbing people off with weak excuses.

 

Cheers - I knew the figure was a bit high as soon as I typed it!

 

My thought was/is that there was no intention to reach the point whereby redress payments were made but rather just wait it out until insolvency. FCA has a few questions to answer here as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this I believe that there had been no intention to pay this redress. Why was this not sorted out by the FCA instead of dragging it on for 6 months

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have logged a complaint with the FCA as I want to know why it was not made clear when they asked CFO to pay the redress that funds were available and why was I told in October I was due a redress to be told yesterday that CFO had gone into administration. I would have preferred not to be told anything and CFO just disappeared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have logged a complaint with the FCA as I want to know why it was not made clear when they asked CFO to pay the redress that funds were available and why was I told in October I was due a redress to be told yesterday that CFO had gone into administration. I would have preferred not to be told anything and CFO just disappeared.

 

Its disheartening I know. Just consider yourself free of these disgraceful vultures that they were and move on with everything :)


**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

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...