Jump to content


SLC/Erudio/Drydens backdoor CCJ's - 1 i already paid, 2nd at set aside.


 Share

Recommended Posts

Open

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

So! Been a while!

 

I spoke to agent back in January, I got angry, I recorded the call. However, they gave me dates and loan codes. I was still waiting for the DSAR to arrive so left them saying I wouldn't be paying and I'd prove it was SB'd.

DSAR arrived shortly after - the dates lined up by day and month but not year:

 

Agent claimed default date - 96' loan - 24/04/17

                                                   00' loan - 26/07/16

 

DSAR deferment end date -   96'          - 24/03/14

                                                   00'          - 24/06/14 

 

I could see on the DSAR that my last correspondence was 13/01/14 for the 96' and 13/06/13 for the 00'

 

The agent said the judgements were made on 05/12/19 for 96' and 08/07/19 for the 00' (although latest letter says 11/09/19!)

       

As you can see, they waited til the 11th hour to place the judgement! 

 

I still think SLC shouldn't have given me a old style loan in 2000 but I don't know how I'd get that looked into now, after all, I did sign the contract back in 2000.

 

Even though I'm loathe to pay the Dryden vampire leaches, I can't see another option.

 

                                  

Screen Shot 2021-12-16 at 12.14.05.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

why are you speaking to fleecers on the phone?

 

forget the defaulted dates, as andyorch says earlier.

 

47 minutes ago, PumpUpTheVolume said:

DSAR deferment end date -   96'          - 24/03/14

                                                   00'          - 24/06/14 

 

your last deferment date were 1 year BEFORE (SB does NOT run from the end - but the initial letter) so they were all SB'd by the time of the claimforms

 

so you've taken almost a year to get absolutely nowhere and could of got these set aside by now and your moneyback.

 

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

I spoke to the fleecers on your recommendation #12

 

 

I gave up when I saw the DSAR.

 

In hindsight I could have fought the 00' as that looks like it was statue barred, the 96' looks like it wasn't - last contact reads as 27/01/14 so last date for judgement would have been 2020, they claim it was made on the 05/12/19.

 

Unless I'm missing something, I don't see how I can beat this.

 

Thank you for your continued assistance, D. 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry you did say January

 

 'contact' means nothing...the loans were all sb'd by the time of litigation.

 

cant keep saying this.

 

 

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

I've read that SB starts from the last time one admits to the debt in writing - does signing a deferment letter not fall under this criteria? In which case, what does?

 

I've been scouring the internet for simple explanations but struggling to find a solid definition.

 

Can you point me towards some concise reading?

 

Many thanks Px 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

not if the deferment didnt happen.

your last forms were to SLC, 2013 

 

there are 10's of erudio/drydens claimform threads here that explain this and the N244 process.

 

use our enhanced google search box

 

 

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

Just as a side point i mentioned before

 

Were the qualifications attained for the 3 loans linked i'e a staggered 3 years course and you took a break resulting in the 00 loan?

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

then as i pointed too earlier, if these will be under the old rules regardless. all the same qualification. so a chain under old mortgage style which is why a 'new' style one got sold on.

 

 

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

then its not an issue .

 

 

  • Like 1

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

Hey there,

 

I've read all the threads on this scam.

 

Bit unsure as what to do next! 

 

Do I ring northants bulk to get particulars of claim 1st, then snail mail demand to set aside to Drydens?

It looks like it'll land on deaf ears but might buy me some time before I action an N244.

Also - asking for CCA, would that be a good idea?

 

Thanks, Px

 

 

 

Edited by PumpUpTheVolume
Link to post
Share on other sites

you certainly need to get all the info yes.

 

then just follow the other threads and get N244's running, they'll not contest it and most probably won't argue the loans were already SB'd. and just leave things be re a re hearing unless the judge decides there needs a hearing after granting the set aside.

now if you'll get your money back is another matter.

 

  • Like 1

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

Ok, so:

 

1. Northants

2.CCA from Drydens

3.N244

 

I'm not going to try and get the 1st claim refunded, I've repaid the loan my work gave me, just seeing it as a very expensive lesson.

 

This one I'll fight tooth and nail. If the 1st gets brought up as to why I'd paid it, I can quite honestly answer that I didn't understand the info on my SLC DSAR. 

Once the judge sees the evidence it'll be clear that Drydens/Erudio have lied about both being SB'd. Do you think it will go against me in court if I don't try to get it back?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no point in CCA's, the debts were SB'd.

 

by it i will guess you mean the money you paid on the other CCJ?

no harm in trying IMHO. cant hurt you eitherway.

 

get the set asides won . that will lead your next moves.

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

Of course! I need to focus on that CCA point.

 

Yep, the other CCJ is satisfied now.

 

Will I need to do separate N244's and court hearings if I want to get both set aside?

 

I haven't checked. I got a letter from Drydens saying it was satisfied.

 

I will deal with the current one for now.

 

I've put a tenner in the jar, will send more come payday.

 

Px

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think you can set aside 2 ccj's using one n244?

 

@Andyorch would know and also about if you can demand the money back you paid. Not something i remember happening here before or even if you should/can set aside a paid ccj.

 

on a small screen..cant scrollback.. Is the paid ccj showing on your file?

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

problems merging here i expect out with the sheep...doesnt matter.

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

what court..bailiffs...this side of xmas...not a chance...:pound:

 

and totally pointless as there is no right of forced entry on consumer credit CCJ debts..so whats the point in ever using them..debtors can simply totally ignore them. see you fell for their threats again..

drydens are jokers united, just like their powerless clients!!

 

 

  • Haha 1

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

not yours ..

  • Like 1

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to SLC/Erudio/Drydens backdoor CCJ's - 1 i already paid, 2nd at set aside.

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...