Advice on debt

[AndyOrch]

But the DCA is required to send NOSA if they are still charging interest 

[dx100uk]

Yes

 

[Angel Steele]

Thanks for replying.      I did think that may have been the case as they date corresponds with when Cabot came on to the scene.     I am not being charged interest BTW.

 

One thing though - there was nothing to indicate Sains had passed this on to a DCA.    Surely there would be something?

[dx100uk]

not in the sar from the oc no

typically the debt buyer sends the Notice of assignment[s}

 

what date did they sell the debt?

 

[Angel Steele]

Sometime in in 2015.   The default has long since gone from my credit report.    I didn't see a Notice of Assignment in the documentation sent, I will check again this eve.

 

 

[Peterbard]

I think you know but the notice informing the debtor that a record of default is being sent to a CRA is not the same as a Default Notice made under section 87 of the Consumer credit act.

The latter must be sent before an agreement can be terminated,  so the  sum due under that terminated agreement can be sold to a debt collector.

 

If the agreement had not been terminated the creditor could only pursue arrears, and the debtor would have the contractual right to pay by instalment once the arrears where paid.

 

I have seen a few of these accounts defaulted in 2015 now, the idea being that they contend  the accounts were under the original agreement until that (2015)date, so the SB date could not have commenced and the record can remain of file for another period.

 

As far as recording the default is concerned, this is a none starter as the report should always mirror the current condition of the account and has nothing to do with a section 87 default which enables the creditor to enforce.

 

You will probably find that the account was assigned in 2015

[Peterbard]

On 22/03/2019 at 11:32, dx100uk said:

w/o means the original creditors has written it off as bad debt on their books.

 

reclaimed against tax and got payouts from their business insurance scheme they might have

then they sell it on to a debt buyer for 15p=£1

then they come after you for the full value

it cant come back on your file.

 

see what cabot do.

get reading up  

This is all a crock DX, although often repeated, to anyone who knows anything about transferring or assigning  assets, a complete crock, sorry.

"w/o means the original creditors has written it off as bad debt on their books." True

reclaimed against tax and got payouts from their business insurance scheme they might have"

 

There is no such thing as tax write off in a case like this. Companies get taxed on their profits, if an account has to be written off there is no profit, this means no tax of course, but this is a minor concern as they have lost any profit. If what you say was true all companies would have to , is purchase goods and burn them. You only pay money to the taxman out of the money you have made.

 

"then they sell it on to a debt buyer for 15p=£1" Why not anything is better than nothing, even though this represents a considerable loss to them

 

The purchasing concern is entitled to recover what he can from the asset purchased, why should he not, he takes the risk of buying a defaulted account.  Anyway  even if he recovered the full amount due under the agreement the debtor would pay no more than he contracted tor(what he owes), and the creditor and assignee between them would recover no more than they were due under the original contract. You have to consider all the debts he purchased, on which he  has been unable to recover anything at all.

 

Sorry DX but I get sick of hearing people say this, it is not just you. 

[Angel Steele]

I'm somewhat more confused now!    Checked the docs last night and it was sold in 2015 and Cabot have been in contact since then.   

[dx100uk]

Wellwhen cabot chase...CCA time

[Angel Steele]

So if Cabot do not produce the CC agreement then what?   If the debt has been sold to them ( they have three of my outstanding btw but are only chasing two at the monent) then what?   I would still need to pay them wouldn't I?   You guys on here may say nope but surely I'd need to pay a nominal amount each month?   Since the letters have started up again as I cancelled my standing order with them it's irritating and time consuming plus a bit stressful too.   I am going to CCA them in due course.

[Angel Steele]

Not sure what a PaP letter is.  This debt has only been assigned to Intrum within the last six months.   I have the letter from Tesco telling me they were doing this.   I doubt it is SB - isn't that where there's been no contact for six years.

[dx100uk]

Letter of claim from a solicitor

No ...no payment.

[renegadeimp]

Keep ignoring everything until that pap letter. IF youre  unsure then come back here and we will help.

[Peterbard]

The statute Barr period commences when the owner can first take action to recover the whole debt.

So this would be on the default, when the agreement has broken down and the account is terminated, in other words neither side are bound by the conditions of the contractual bargain. Section 5 of the Statute of limitations 1980.

After six years the debt is barred from any enforcement action, under statute.

 

However under section 29 of that act, if the debtor should acknowledge the debt within that six years(by for instance making a payment)., the period re-starts and the six years begins to run again from that point.

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by Dodgeball

[Peterbard]

5 hours ago, Angel Steele said:

 if Cabot do not produce the CC agreement then what?   If the debt has been sold to them ( they have three of my outstanding btw but are only chasing two at the monent) then what?   I would still need to pay them wouldn't I?   You guys on here may say nope but surely I'd need to pay a nominal amount each month?   Since the letters have started up again as I cancelled my standing order with them it's irritating and time consuming plus a bit stressful too.   I am going to CCA them in due course.

 

The point is that although the DCA can still bother you for payments, he cannot hope to win any court action.  Without that threat, it is safe to ignore any threats of CCJs Bailiffs etc. 

 

RE Assignments

 

If the debt had not been sold/ assigned to the DCA ,the DCA would have no rights under the contract to enforce in court.

 

The purpose of the assignment is to put the DCA(assignee), in , "the creditors shoes", That is to place the DCA in the same position  the creditor was, and enable him to take an action in the same way. 

 

One of the technicalities of this kind of action(absolute assignment) is that the debtor must be made aware of what is happening, section 139.

If a letter is not sent to the debtor ,by either party, informing him of the assignment, then the absolute assignment is void. The DCA would have no right to sue.

[Angel Steele]

13 hours ago, Dodgeball said:

 

RE Assignments

 

If the debt had not been sold/ assigned to the DCA ,the DCA would have no rights under the contract to enforce in court.

 

The purpose of the assignment is to put the DCA(assignee), in , "the creditors shoes", That is to place the DCA in the same position  the creditor was, and enable him to take an action in the same way. 

 

One of the technicalities of this kind of action(absolute assignment) is that the debtor must be made aware of what is happening, section 139.

If a letter is not sent to the debtor ,by either party, informing him of the assignment, then the absolute assignment is void. The DCA would have no right to sue.

 

Many thanks for this information.    

 

If debt not assigned/sold to DCA then DCA cannot enforce to court - ok I get that bit but then you say purpose of assignment is to put assignee in creditor's shoes - so if letter of assignment has been sent then DCA can take action in the same way.    Ok then regarding my above post about Tesco and Ingrum - Tesco sent letter advising of assignment so effectively Ingrum have creditor's powers now yet I am being advised to CCA them?  Don't get that at all.

 

Re Cabot - I have not had any letter of assignment advising me of anything from either Lloyds or Sainburys or Cabot .

 

[Peterbard]

The statute Barr period commences when the owner can first take action to recover the whole debt.

So this would be on the default, when the agreement has broken down and the account is terminated, in other words neither side are bound by the conditions of the contractual bargain. Section 5 of the Statute of limitations 1980.

After six years the debt is barred from any enforcement action, under statute.

 

However under section 29 of that act, if the debtor should acknowledge the debt within that six years, the period re-starts, or the six years begins to run again from that point.

 

A CCA request for "true Copies of your agrement are made under 77 of yhe CCA for a fixed sum .oan, 78 for a Credit Card , 79 for a HP agrement etc.

 

A "true copy does not mean a photo copy # all the dicument must contain are the details of the bargain. Ammount loaned, interst, installments etc. It does not need signatures etc or any personal information of the debtor.

 

If the creditor does not send the "true copy" within the stated time the creditor cannot enforce the agreement, in other words the judge is unable to issue judgement against the debtor. It can also be in any form.

 

Being unable to enforce does not mean the creditor cannot record the default on your credit file, but the creditor should inform you that they ae unable to take proceedings in court for recovrery of the debt.

 

More later

[Peterbard]

4 hours ago, Angel Steele said:

 

Many thanks for this information.    

 

If debt not assigned/sold to DCA then DCA cannot enforce to court - ok I get that bit but then you say purpose of assignment is to put assignee in creditor's shoes - so if letter of assignment has been sent then DCA can take action in the same way.    Ok then regarding my above post about Tesco and Ingrum - Tesco sent letter advising of assignment so effectively Ingrum have creditor's powers now yet I am being advised to CCA them?  Don't get that at all.

 

Re Cabot - I have not had any letter of assignment advising me of anything from either Lloyds or Sainburys or Cabot .

 

 

Yes I see what you mean. The thing is that the original creditor is more likely to have the original agreement, or is more likely to be able to re-construct one by referring to other products they had available from the time of execution.

 

The CCAct said that the DCA or any other body receiving a request should forward it to the OC, this is slightly altered by the FCA, I would send one too both , recorded if it were me.

 

Sorry about the spelling in a hurry today ,and my checker seems to be off line

[Peterbard]

I have just spent a little more time on your letter. It is designed to confuse, but rest assured thatt judge would not make a judgement in favour of a party who was prevented from enforcing said judgement by law.

 

Andy and DX I think you will find the handbook suggests that an application may be necessary to the previous owner.