Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • get the FOS done and see. i have a feeling you might not need to do the latter.    
    • Noted, thanks re-draft it is then 🙄    If it does go to FOS and its upheld can I also go for the throat and apply to set aside the suspended judgement (consent order) based  CCA  sections 86E not providing default sum notices 86(5) not entitled to enforce agreement  87(1) and 88(2) leading to unlawful repudiation of the credit agreement. Just an idea. 
    • CB ....this conclusion is true.   as for PB, i can assure you that user most probably ( well i know but shouldn't say} holds the record here for the most reported posts by users as well as from those of the site team concerning his posts. if you hold on someones username further info can be seen.   however , a bit like say vodaphone or virgin media , very large companies with millions of customers will get the most complaints made against them...and that equates to posting levels here too. as for 'royalties account holder' that again merely points, by a default label in the software package we use, to the number of posts made.   one could further this by noting were we to agree with all their posts they would be on the siteteam... i will leave you to understand why not .....       don't think anyone did?    regards  DX
    • Is it just that? Oh I thought it was because of all the effort he and others made to rightly bring DCBL to court. But he just got lucky there I suppose. Lucky he didn't bring his complaint to this forum first because if he had of done, he'd be £10K poorer right now. And for something that Peterbard describes as benefitting from being newsworthy, I am struggling to find all the news reports that refer to it.       Confucius  say "he who backpedals, falls off bike."    I'm not surprised in the least that you, a gold account holder on this forum, would adopt a dismissive attitude to this well deserved victory in court against DCBL, however I'm curious as to why you opted to reduce the issues at stake to being 'simply' about ' the EA fell foul of the regulation which defines "relevant premises".   That certainly wasn't any argument that Iain Gould furthered and he's a civil actions lawyer whom, dare I say it, know a hell of a lot more about trespass and misuse of private information than you do.   The judge never mentioned "relevant premises" either. Not during the hearing or in his judgement. And you never mentioned it either prior to know. In fact, in the original  in the original 2018 thread you even went so far as to suggest that whatever address was on the writ was irrelevant because, "interestingly, if the address is not  a requirement it would not be possible to sue the bailiff for wrong attendance under section 66."   Not that your wrongfully held opinion that non debtors are also subject to the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 matters, because as I had already pointed out in the first video because the claimant wasn't suing for wrong attendance under section 66.   He sued for trespass. Part 66 never applied to him because he was not the debtor and never had been. You and the likes of DCBL can disregard that obvious point as much as you like, but bailiffs do not have a blanket immunity from trespass.   Have a look at the article Iain Gould has written on his blog about the case. It might help you understand the tort of trespass in some small way, and might help you adopt a more balanced approach to those poor sods who owed no debt and have had their homes raided and their privacy breached by EAs, and then - to add insult to injury - they come to you looking for help.   What makes it worse is that your defective understanding of when an Enforcement Agents action can give rise to trespass is backed up by your site team members who think it's their job to echo your mistakes not by justifying what you say - because they can't - but by making defamatory remarks at the expense of those who give the 'correct advice'.   Unlike you and your team members I don't hide behind the protection of anonymity. Nobody can hold you to account if you get it wrong, or heaven forbid, if it turns out you  have been working for a firm of debt collectors all along. To add to this, you don't seem to care much about removing libellous remarks from your forum when a legitimate complaint is raised.   To respond to Bank Fodders comment that "At some point in the video it has screenshots of this forum and the narrative suggests that some people agree that an enforcement agent has the power to enter into a property to check on identity. I think that it is intended that the CAG is associated with this belief."   Seriously? I have to point it out to you.   Maybe it has something to do with key members of this forum smearing me on the original thread by saying how wrong my narrative was and then implying I was a Freeman of the Land.   Maybe it had something to do with Gold Member Peter Bard leaving this comment on the same thread that stated:   "The point I was trying to make is that the EA will not be as interested in paperwork as in physical proof that the debtor does or does not live there.   As said there is no requirement for an address on a warrant, in fact the debtor may live at several addresses and the bailiff may attend to serve at any of them. The warrant is against the debtor, not the debtor at an address. It requires only enough info to identify the person.( see CPR wherever it is).   The bailiff will be much more interested in getting in and checking for clothes in wardrobes, sleeping accommodation, letters etc."   I'm sorry if that wasn't enough for you to justify me bringing that point up in the video. I did consider coming here before I completed it and asking those members if they intended to maintain their position that the Enforcement Agent had acted within the law but strangely the forum account I had used to make my first and only posting on this forum in 2018 - to counter the smears - would not allow me to sign in.   Far be it from me to draw any conclusions about my input not being welcome here, I figured Peterbard and some of the key members here would use their creative skills at providing a blanket immunity from civil liability for all EAs by misinterpreting key legislation in their behalf.    It looks like I was right about that also. Unfortunately I have given in to temptation, and am choosing to respond, even though I know how utterly futile it is.
    • There was another poster (Hammy1962) who understood (#3) the distance selling point you were trying to make, but you may have inadvertantly put him off in your subsequent post.  He may still be following this thread.  Wonder if he has any ideas that could possibly help you?    I'm concerned about how you continue if the TS route is not helpful...
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 5 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Arrow/Moorcroft - old Vigin MBNA card debt


Recommended Posts

But each time you pay that £1 it resets the 6 year statute barred clock.

 

However they failed a CCA request, stop paying them, it isn’t enforceable. They are taking you for a fool.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

So a default will drop off my credit file after six year, unpaid or paid.

 

Then to get it Statute Barred, I need to wait six years from last payment.

 

So If I paid them £1000 now, it wouldn't affect my Credit File, but it may stop them coming after me for the full £3500 in three years time?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No its statute barred if there is no payment or acknowledgment for 6 years...so say for argument sake if you had stopped paying  5 years ago when the default notice was issued...it would be statute barred next year (England & Wales)

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, thats what i was saying, SB is six years from last payment.

 

To get a mortgage, I presume the banks are looking at whats on my credit file, so when the defualt gets to six years and drops off my credit file, a mortgage company wouldn't even see it?

 

But the DCA could add a second default towards the end of the six years could they not?

So it would be better to have the account partially settled?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

But the DCA could add a second default towards the end of the six years could they not?

So it would be better to have the account partially settled?

 

 

No.....as per my first post #21

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

no a dca can't default you file

and once the OC's default reaches 6yrs and the account vanishes

it can't comeback and no-one can see it..

 

 

 

 

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
Posted (edited)

ok great, thanks

 

What I'm worried about is being taken to court, like PRA tried to.

 

I'm thinking that giving Moorcroft £1000 to Partially Settle the account, will make it less likely they will come after me in the future.

 

And if they do take me to court after partially settling the account, we would have a much better defence in court.

Edited by benq
Link to post
Share on other sites

nope.

so where this CCA return they sent you with all the enforceable documents and signed agreement you requested?
 

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
50 minutes ago, benq said:

Yes, thats what i was saying, SB is six years from last payment.

 

To get a mortgage, I presume the banks are looking at whats on my credit file, so when the defualt gets to six years and drops off my credit file, a mortgage company wouldn't even see it?

 

But the DCA could add a second default towards the end of the six years could they not?

So it would be better to have the account partially settled?

 

Once it's off your file no mortgage company or lender can see it. It's as if it never really existed. DCA's are powerless despite acting to the contrary, they cannot add another default and they cannot stop a debt going statute Barred.

 

There are multiple factors involved in mortgage eligibility. A large deposit, if you have one can cover a multitude of evils, even a 6 month old CCJ.  However, the older a CCJ / default is, the less bearing it has on the result.  You would be doing yourself a favour to find a good broker who can find you the best deal.  However, I stress that partially paying off a 4 year old default is not going to make a difference one way or the other.

 

As for being taken to court, it might never happen, or might be years from now. They would have to be pretty stupid to try it after ignoring your CCA request.  Besides, even at that point, if you lose you can avoid a CCJ by paying it.

 

I hate seeing people waste money, especially to bottom feeders like Moorcroft.  I'm going to put it in caps STOP PAYING THEM THEY FAILED A CCA.

 

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I appreciate that.

 Arrow did actually respond to my CCA request, but i dont think they sent fully what is legally required.

 

Arrow have sent documents, but does it constitute a full CCA?
They have sent
-copy of originators statements
-A copy of the agreement
-a copy of t+cs
They then say they 'We are awaiting the notice of default and will send if available'

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm thinking that giving Moorcroft £1000 to Partially Settle the account, will make it less likely they will come after me in the future.

And if they do take me to court after partially settling the account, we would have a much better defence in court.

 

Not really...wake up a smell the coffee....your £1000 payment simply lines the pockets of DCAs...prolongs your liability...makes it harder to defend should they issue a court claim.

 

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

scan up the cca return to one multipage PDF

read upload carefully

 

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
  • 2 months later...

Hi Guys,

 

I've gone ahead with this, and I've got the below reply from Moorcroft

 

We write to confirm we and our client are prepared to accept £1000 as partial settlement of your account.

Provided that payment is made in accordance with this letter, neither we nor our client will take any further steps in relation to recovery of the remaining balance.

Once your payment is cleared we will inform our client of this settlement so that, if appropriate, they can update your CreditFile with the various Credit reference Agencies and mark the account as partially asatisfied. Any relevent entry on your credit file will be reflected for six years from the date of default.

If you wish to accept this offer please call us on the above telephone number within the next 14 days.

 

I belive this letter would put me in a good place, should anyone try to take money, or take me to court in the future. It would also look good on a Mortgage application if it is questioned in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How come you didn't scan up your CCA documents like you were advised to?

 

It won't make a blind bit of difference to any mortgage application.  

 

1. Even while it's still showing, it's ancient , and almost irrelevant

2. It will be invisible for ever the year after next

 

I say this with respect, we've been advising you, and you either don't believe us or are not listening.  So this forum is about honest impartial advice. You are quite simply throwing away your money!

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. I do appreciate everything you all do, dont get me wrong :)

 

I'm worried that I will apply for a mortgage, a credit check will be ran on me, and all this debt will show up.

Even after the default is lifted, if a credit check is ran on me, this debt will still show as outstanding.

 

If I can partially settle it now, at least the total amount owed is now less and is partially settle, which will look better to any future mortgage lender than having the full balance outstanding.

 

And if i get taken to court over this in the future, I will be in a better position as i have a letter advising no further action will be taken.

Link to post
Share on other sites

not sure where you are getting this idea that any debt ever shows after a default reaches it's 6th birthday

it DOESNT.

 

and a PS will leave you open for a further 6yrs for them to sell the rest of the debt on to another DCA debt buyer as it won't ever be SB'd.

 

:noidea:

 

 

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

If you are giving away money CAG could use it :becky:

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression the default and the actual monetary debt were seperate things.

So whilst the default will fall off my credit file six years after it was applied,

the actual monetary debt will stay forever,

as it's still outstanding.

 

Are you saying that six years after the default was applied, not only will the default drop off my file, but the actual monetary debt will drop off as well?

 

NB, I'm not too worried about SB on this one, as I've been paying them £1 a month for the past five years. I've got stepchange to thank for advising that one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as stated earlier:

 

The Information Commissioners Office says:
.
All references to a defaulted debt must be removed from your credit files after 6 years 
has passed from date of default, whether paid off, paying now or not. 
.
{the WHOLE ACCOUNT WILL VANISH, never to return}.
.
{however, this does not mean the debt itself is not still owed
consider a CCA request.}
.
This is so that someone who continues paying something 
- even after 6 years from default 
- should not be at a disadvantage to someone who pays nothing after default 
and ends up with a clean file after 6 years. 
.
NOTE: {the bracketed text is not Information Commissioners Office guideline but my advise]
 

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

Thats great news for getting a mortgage in a few years time, I did not know that!

 

However I'm still leaning towards partially settling the debt. Only for the reason that if I do nothing, and keep the £1 payment going, Moorcroft can still litigate, and I could be liable for the whole £3500, possibly more if the judge finds in their favour and adds to that £3500.

I'f I pay this £1000 and get it partially settled, and they agree not to go after me in the future, and then they do go after me, I'll be in a much better place when it come to sitting across from their solicitor and a judge.

I know it may never happen, but the bottom line is that it may happen, and it has happened to me before.

 

Also, after paying this £1000, i can stop my £1 a month payment, thus ceasing servicing the account. So in six year time it will become SB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Or stop paying it anyway...as Moorcroft do not litigate........

 

 

60197-200.png

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what everyone is trying to tell you, that for a lot of people £1,000 is a massive amount of money, it's frustrating that you are ignoring the advice of people who have first hand knowledge of how this works. Who don't want any commission from you etc. 

 

As for litigation? If their case was that solid they surely would have taken you to court already and crushed you for the full £3500! Lol, they are not on their knees begging for £1,000 out of the kindness of their heart, it's because that's their only chance of getting anything from you.

 

Now if the default was only a year old, and you wanted a mortgage right now, paying £1000 to them on condition of them removing everything from your credit file would potentially be worth it. However once a default is more than 3 years old, mortgage companies really don't care very much, and as explained before at 6 years old it is invisible to anybody, including lenders.

 

 

 

 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, benq said:

Moorcroft can still litigate,

 

grrr!! please read what has been advised several times...moorcroft are acting for their client....

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

Here is a summary of this conversation for those who don't want to read the whole thing:

 

OP: Hello, I have made a decision and I am looking for advice which will comfort me that I made the right decision.

CAG: Hello, thanks for coming here. Your decision is wrong and you will lose money.

OP: Thank you. However I have made a decision and I am looking for advice which will comfort me that I made the right decision.

CAG: Nooo, don't do it. It's not the right decision.

OP: Thank you so much. However I made my decision and I am only looking for advice which will comfort me that I made the right decision

CAG: Ahhhhrgh

 

 

@OP   I can tell you with total confidence that you have made the right decision. Go ahead and pay that £1000. It's totally the right decision if it can make you sleep easy at night and confident that you have received advice which has comforted you in making the right decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just trying to mitigate any future action that may be taken against me. I would hate it for some company to attempt to take me to court in five years time, and win, with expenses, possibly totalling £4000 PLUS. I'd be kicking myself thinking that it could have been avoided by paying £1000 all those years ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...