Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


Foolishly

SLL Capital and their rights under assignment

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

There is a problem here, in that a warning letter from a creditor to say he is about to record a default on your file, is not the same as a DN under section 87 of the CCA 1974.

 

This is not picked up by the FCA, t least I cant find it, however. Probably no equivalent in German legislation.

 

A not ice of default is issued just to warn of an intended notification on the file, it is not about enforcement,(see Rankin,Mc Guffick) and gives 30 days.

 

A section 87 DN, as shown by Andy is a warning of intending enforcement action.

 

However the fees are a different question, here I think conc will come to your rescue.

 

ONC 7.7.2 R 01/04/2014 RP

A firm must not claim the costs of recovering a debt from a customer if it has no contractual right to claim such costs.

 

[Note: paragraph 3.11b of DCG]

CONC 7.7.3 R 01/04/2014 RP

A firm must not cause a customer to believe that the customer is legally liable to pay the costs of recovery where no such obligation exists.

 

[Note: paragraph 3.11a of DCG]

CONC 7.7.4 G 01/04/2014 RP

Where a firm has a contractual right to levy default charges, a regulated credit agreement must state the charges and the conditions for making the charge under, as the case may be, the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/1014) or the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553).

 

[Note: paragraphs 3.11c of DCG and 7.15 of ILG]

CONC 7.7.5 R 01/04/2014 RP

A firm must not impose charges on customers in default or arrears difficulties unless the charges are no higher than necessary to cover the reasonable costs of the firm.

 

[Note: paragraphs 3.11 of DCG and 7.15 of ILG]

Edited by Dodgeball

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I do however agree that the account should have been terminated prior to sale. 87DN


DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

careful reading of the termination letter is needed I think.

if it says the agreement is terminated, if that mean under the CCA ...then surely a default notice and thus a defaulted status and a date in the debt summary cannot be entered by anyone. the Agreement under the act is dead. no agreement to even register a DN against the debtor exists...

 

 

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Sorry I couldn't get the termination letter up.

 

Yes if the agreement is terminated, there must have been a section 87 and 14 days.

 

However registering a default is only down to a " breakdown in the relationship"

 and the warning is just a letter stating that if this is not sorted in thirty days a d will be, etc.

 

A terminated agreement is not "dead DX". Sorry It is another one of those things.

When an Agreement is terminated, it means the terms do not apply.

 

Most importantly, the term which says the debtor can re-pay by instalment. This is why a debt must be terminated before a creditor can sue for the total due in one payment. The sum is due under the terminated contract, is what the court will chase.

 

Entry or none entry on a credit file is within the purview of the ICO, not the CCA.

 

It has nothing to do with enforcement mate.

 

If your saying the DN 87is bad, then the creditor can just issue another one, there is case law, emmm Jones is it???

Edited by Dodgeball

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the op's issue is:

 

Original Lender: PDL FINANCE LIMITED T/A MR LENDER
You will have received a DEFAULT NOTICE - you should contact SLL immediately
You were recently posted a Default Notice from SLL Capital due to your breach of payment as per your consumer credit agreement. As you have not paid the full amount or made a successful payment arrangement, you have broken the agreement.

You now have 21 days from the date on the Default Notice to repay the full amount outstanding. If you pay this before the required payment date, no further enforcement action will take place and we will confirm closure of your account.

If we do not receive the payment by the required date or an agreed payment arrangement, further action may be taken against you.

You can arrange payment and find out more about default action on our website, please follow the link to our Default Notice Page:

 

the debt buyer has issued the DN not the original creditor...

can a debt buyer issue a DN?

 

yes or no...don't need pages of law quotes...it's your knowledge people seek..that's your strength here.


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never received a termination letter,

I also never received any notice of assignment from Mr Lender.

 

There is no mention of a termination,

no reference to SLL Capital and nothing referenced to letters issued in the data received from Mr Lender.

 

I did notice three copies of what I presume to be their Credit File search on myself,

however 2 of them are dated 2012 and one is dated 2016, very strange.

 

The data received states on the 16/08/16; written off- sold to DCA.

 

My credit file entry states Mr Lender 16/08/16 balance £200 - settled.

 

The entry from SLL Capital has the date it commenced 16/08/16.

They state the Defaulted date as being 26/09/16 - balance £344.

 

I never received a DN from SLL Capital to warn of the possibility of the account defaulting and nothing received to inform they marked my CF on 26/9/16 as defaulted.

 

The first correspondence received from SLL Capital was on 18/01/17 and that was informing me they owned the debt by assignment, nothing prior to this date.

 

After that date I received numerous emails on a monthly basis, to inform me of a recent DN issued from them and each one states 21 days from the default date to prevent the account defaulting.

 

Seems to be something they do to scare people into accepting a payment plan.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesnt matter what you got or didn't

Your credit file states a defaulted date in the summary

The debt buyer registered that.

 

Can they? Simple question yes or no.DB


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Unless a new agreement has been made.

 

However the Dn posted, is not a notice under 87, remedies are incorrect, and should be headed Under section 87 etc.. I think you said similar earlier.

 

and it seems to be a notice of assignment.

Of sorts?

Also it is a motice warning about filng with the CRA. So that is why the extended remedy period.

They would have to issue a compliant   dn before any court action could be considered, the quff about recovering costs is completely out of order.

 

Do we have the agreement 

 

 


DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The agreement from original lender, Yes

Any agreements from the buyer, No 

I have not received anything in relation to the mark placed on my CF, they never contacted me until Jan 17, the defaulted mark was placed my CF in Sept 16.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Could we have a look at the original agreement please. Was this a copy provided under section 77 or a copy you kept from the application?

 

There is mention of the default placement on the so called dn in section 4. But you say that by the time this was sent the marker was already on the CRA account, is that correct?

Edited by Dodgeball

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Dodgeball said:

There is mention of the default placement on the so called dn in section 4. But you say that by the time this was sent the marker was already on the CRA account, is that correct?

Yes the CRA was marked sept 2016. The DN to warn of possible default action that I uploaded was received and dated in 2018, quite a big difference in the time periods.

1 hour ago, Dodgeball said:

Could we have a look at the original agreement please. Was this a copy provided under section 77 or a copy you kept from the application?

Yes will upload the agreements 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi sorry for the delay. Please read in full.

 

Well ,the proper procedure has not been followed in the termination of this account, the default charges and elongated interst periods are unlikely to bre upheld by any judge and the agreement would not be adequate under  section 61, 127(1) 87  also the APR is out IMO.

 

So your choice. Personally, and others will disagree. I would not say anything. if you want to challenge in total, why inform them of your defence?   Plus, I think it would result in continued harassment. If it went to court you would have a good chance of it being thrown out. Not sure it would even get to that point to be honest.

I suppose you could tell them you will be contesting any action, it may stop them attempting a default judgement.

 

You could make them a one-off offer in writing(if you have means) of payment of the original sum  by instalments of say £5A month.

But whatever figure you decide, by letter or email, and it is none negotiable, or as you will say to them, " it is the most I can squeeze out of my budget and still pay my priority expenses.

I have done this for people even without the creditors OK, just sent the first payment off, and heard nothing back. It is probably all a court would award anyway, dependant on your circumstances of course.

 

Sorry of I appear to be self contradictory, just trying to give you all the options.

 

If you  want a letter, just post back and someone will advise further, if I am not about.

Edited by Dodgeball

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply I do appreciate your advice.

Can I just ask though, in relation to the action already taken by the DCA (not the OC) in placing a mark on my CF to portray the account has been defaulted I am correct that should not have been done by the DCA,  they no legal right/powers, they could not in their own right default an account purchased by assignment. This should be done be the OC before writing off the debt. Therefore they should remove the default mark.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO they should..

was your cre4dit file shot with defaults from others etc and poor when you got this loan?

 

i'm wondering if to short circuit the whole thing and put in an irresponsible lending claim to Mr L.

 

dx

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

Share this post


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...