Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
    • Thanks for all the suggestions so far I will amend original WS and send again for review.  While looking at my post at very beginning when I submitted photos of signs around the car park I noticed that it says 5 hours maximum stay while the signage sent by solicitor shows 4 hours maximum stay but mine is related to electric bay abuse not sure if this can be of any use in WS.
    • Not sure what to make of that or what it means for me, I was just about to head to my kip and it's a bit too late for legalise. When is the "expenditure occured"?  When they start spending money to write to me?  Or is this a bad thing (as "harsh" would imply)? When all is said and done, I do not have two beans to rub together, we rent our home and EVERYTHING of value has been purchased by and is in my wife's name and we are not financially linked in any way.  So at least if I can't escape my fate I can at least know that they will get sweet FA from me anyway   edit:  ah.. Sophia Harrison: Time bar decision tough on claimants WWW.SCOTTISHLEGAL.COM Time bar is a very complex area of law in Scotland relating to the period in which a claim for breach of duty can be pursued. The Scottish government...   This explains it like I am 5.  So, a good thing then because creditors clearly know they have suffered a loss the minute I stop paying them, this is why it is "harsh" (for them, not me)? Am I understanding this correctly?  
    • urm......exactly what you filed .....read it carefully... it puts them to strict proof to prove the debt is enforceable, so thus 'holds' their claim till they coughup or not and discontinue. you need to get readingthose threads i posted so you understand. then you'll know whats maybe next how to react or not and whats after that. 5-10 threads a day INHO. dont ever do anything without checking here 1st.
    • I've done a new version including LFI's suggestions.  I've also change the order to put your strongest arguments first.  Where possible the changes are in red.  The numbering is obviously knackered.  See what you think. Background  1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of November 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.  Unfair PCN  4.1  On XXXXX the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) the solicitors helpfully sent photos of 46 signs in their evidence all clearly showing a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will  be reduced if paid promptly).  There can be no room for doubt here - there are 46 signs produced in the Claimant's own evidence. 4.2  Yet the PCN affixed to the vehicle was for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced if paid promptly).  The reminder letters from the Claimant again all demanded £100. 4.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.   4.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim. No Locus Standi 2.1  I do not believe a contract exists with the landowner that gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-  (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or  (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44  For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.  2.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The contract produced was largely illegible and heavily redacted, and the fact that it contained no witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “No Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract. Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed  3.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.  3.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses this document.  No Keeper Liability  5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.  5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.    5.3        The claimant did not mention the parking period instead only mentioned time 20:25 which is not sufficient to qualify as a parking period.   Protection of Freedoms Act 2012  The notice must -  (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; 22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim. 5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable. Interest 6.2  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for four years in order to add excessive interest. Double Recovery  7.1  The claim is littered with made-up charges. 7.2  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100. 7.3  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims. 29. Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practise continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.” 30. In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverable under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...'' 31. In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 2) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case. 7.7        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.  7.8        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).  In Conclusion  8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim. Statement of Truth I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Paragon have my debt to Arrow Global, what to do next?


lobo200
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5473 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi

 

Section (b) on that statement says (right at the end) that they may disclose to any credit agency - this seems to contradict the disclosure statement you posted previously.:confused:

See what the 1984 DPA actually says anyway.

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

sorry for the delay....

 

It's all on the back of the same form however so not sure what to make of that.

 

Interestingly:

- They have claimed not to have received the SAR request that was sent with the £10 fee via recorded delivery but they have cashed the cheque

- The balance of the account has changed (reduced) in the last 2 months despite no payment being made, even if they had allocated the £10 SAR fee to the account (which my letter told them not to do) it doesn't account for the difference

 

I was told this over the phone, I didn't really bother trying to tell the telephone agent about legal rights to Data etc as it would have been met with the telephone equivalent of a blank unintelligable expression so I'm waiting for their letter.

 

However, as they are not a credit agency, does the above disclosure statement on the CCA hold any ground for dispute?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Does the later doc (Paragon) have any statement on it that they may assign their rights under the agreement at any time to a 3rd party or anything else that suggests you gave consent for data to be passed outside the Group (other than to a CRA - which you consented to by signing)?

 

Regards, Pam

VITAL - IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE ABOUT THE INCREASED BAILIFFS' POWERS TO BREAK INTO YOUR HOME AND USE FORCE IN ORDER TO GET YOUR GOODS THEN JOIN THE PETITION HERE:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....l#post53879 9

 

Anyone seeing this who wants to help by copying it to their signature please do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't find anything else regarding the assignment of rights on the CCA but I'll check when I get home, I'm pretty sure those are the only disclosure statements though.

 

Section 8b on the back of the cca form (the above attachment) is quite confusing though as it mentions I authorise them to check/verify/disclose details of the transaction to a company or 3rd person connected with the business of Paragon or their holding companies.

 

So is the 'transaction' -

The fact a loan was taken out?

Or does this authorise them to sell the loan on and thus pass all personal data on?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lobo,

 

Not had any reply following my request for documentation from Arrow, they have banked my £1 though, CBS are still ringing me but as I refuse to answer their "data protection" questions so they put the phone down on me,,, anyway have finally sent CBS a letter telling them matter is in dispute and the reason is none of their business, (found on another link) just liked it, anyway also added the line that continual phone calls will constitute harrassment.

 

What I am looking for is a letter to send to Arrow stating they have not fulfilled my request and have committed a criminal offence, what I have find just doesn't seem to fit, any comments or guidance appreciated.

 

By the way they obviously have not got contact details for my ex as they have not attempted to contact her at all.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi Folks,

 

A quickie update for you,

 

It's been 5 months since my S.A.R request to Arrow Global, have heard nothing back.

 

Now, previously, when the loan was with Paragon, they had put nothing on my Credit File, nothing at all, not even registering the fact there was a loan.

 

In April, Arrow Global registered a default on the loan and put it on the credit file.

 

No default notices were sent by Paragon prior to this, no official default notice sent by Arrow either (just the usual 'you owe us money now')

 

Now when I spoke to Arrow some time ago about the data protection stuff, the manager I spoke to said they don't hold any of the actual account history etc (letters, correspondence that Paragon would have had) yet the very first letter I received from Arrow advised me that they were now the data owners. Surely this means they *should* have all the correspondence etc.

 

What would the next step be? (if any?) Is Arrow within it's rights to register a default like this?

 

I'm still waiting to hear from them (for about 2 months now) since I forwarded a letter to them I had from Paragon over a year ago with their offer to settle the debt for a quarter of the balance (the letter was not time-limited either).

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contact them and ask for a copy of their complaints procedure. You must make a complaint to them before you can complain to the FOS. Complain to Trading Standards, the Data Protection Registrar, Information Commisioners Office and it would do no harm to contact your local MP. That should keep you amused for quite some time. The cowboys think they are way above the law. Fortuneately even a Mickey Mouse company such as theirs is not. They have broken hosts of rules and will be mad to suffer the consequences. Its really that simple. The law is the law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Paragon provided a joint loan to myself and my former partner about 1997. It went bad about 2002 when I lost my job and she left. I contacted Paragon and set up token repayment plan. Been keeping that going since. Never had anything from them except monthly letters reminding me my payment was coming due. Sent them six monthly copies of my I&E so they could see there wasn't anything more they could get.

They still keep my former partners name on all correspondence despite me informing them, I don't know where she is!

 

Got a letter from Arrow last December telling me they've been assigned my debt by Paragon.

Got a letter from CBS Transcom in January telling me that they had been instructed by Arrow to collect the debt immediately.

Another letter from Arrow in March offering help by partnering me up with blackandwhite.co.uk

Another letter from Arrow in April telling me again that Paragon have assigned my debt to them.

A letter from Transcom in May acknowledging my letter and I&E account enclosing a paying in book for future payments.

Letter from Cope's solicitors June, saying I haven't responded to their previous letters???, that I had been given the opportunity to contact them to commence monthly payments, or increase monthly payments to the rate set by their client. Must contact them immediately to arrange repayment. Legal proceedings in 10 days if no immediate contact.

Letter from cope's August -formal notice of intent to issue legal proceedings - want the full sum - seems to include all interest which should have been frozen back when my problems started. They want it in cleared funds by 16.00 on 13th August or they will issue legal proceedings.

 

I'm going to send a CCA request to Arrow today(copy to Copes*CBS), with a SAR to Paragon any other suggestions??

Link to post
Share on other sites

would suggest sar to arrow or CBS as they are the debt controllers now, paragon have got what they want from arrow/cbs.. cash now... arrow / cbs have not been able to supply me with docs, I have informed trading standards about this they are investigating, also complained to oft and data protection

go for it, let them prove you owe them anything first

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

holy thread revival :)

 

Well, it's been well over a year since I sent them a copy of the letter from Paragon stating what THEY were prepared to accept to settle the account and also a copy of the SAR letter.

 

To this date I STILL have not yet had a reply to this but they have recently (under CBS Transcom) demanded an immediate installment and subsequent installments in order to clear the overall balance.

 

I'm going to resend one of my old letters stating what I previously requested.

 

Oh and the balance of the account has changed over the last three letters they've sent me! (Since December 2006) although I'll be disputing the claimed amount anyway due to what I believe are going to be unfair interest charges.

 

Any further advice would be gratefully appreciated as to how I can approach the fact that given it's been 14 months since last contact and they haven't provided me with the SAR (despite cashing the cheque for it!!)

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, how's this?

 

---------------

 

Dear Sir/Madam

I do not acknowledge any debt to your or your clients company.

I refer to my previous letters dated 19th March 2007 & 16th January 2007 where I have stated that the account is in dispute over your clients claim of ownership of the debt, the right to process my data and the Subject Access Request which has, as yet failed to turn up despite the statutory £10 fee being cashed in respect of this request.

You were required by law to supply me with this information and have failed to do so within the prescribed period.

To re-iterate, you were required to provide the following

1.) Proof of ownership of the debt (Under S.189 of the CCA 1974)

2.) Under section 7 (1) of the Data Protection Act you were required to provide me with all information held on record relating to the account in dispute.

In addition, under the Data Protection Act 1998 you cannot asume the right to process my data without my written consent, this has not been provided, with exception of the information (2) that I had previously requested that you supply me.

As you have failed to provide the requested information for 14 months this constitutes non-compliance of the request made and is a criminal offence under the above act. As a gesture of good will, I shall permit a further 14 days for you to provide this information before I take this matter further.

As the account is in dispute and the above information has not been provided as required by law, any legal action that you may contemplate with be both vigorously defended and contested.

Further demands for payment will be regarded as harrassment and legal action will be pursued.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

Hi, I'm new to the site and need advice about Arrow Global LLC/CBS Transcom, as they are threatening to take my husband to Court over a debt passed to them by Monument (via Raphael's Bank and Compucredit International Aquisition Corporation).

 

We don't dispute the debt is owed (it was run up along with others during a time when we were going thorugh a set of difficult and tragic circumstances) and we are making regular payments to a number of creditors (including them). However, they won't accept the payments offered and they've asked for bigger payments than we can afford.

Everyone else has been helpful (so far).

 

I've been reading your 'threads' about these companies and Data protection and, wondered if there was anything I could do to avoid this going to Court.

 

I didn't know how to start a new 'Thread'....

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Guys

 

I could really do with some help/advice. My wife and I took out an 15K unsecured loan with Paragon Finance in 1999, moved house with work in 2001 and in 2002 contacted Paragon to say we were having difficulty in meeting the payments on our loan. I THOUGHT we had agreed reduced payments and a freeze on interest, made contact on a regular basis with Paragon to review payment and they seemed very understanding and helpful. Moved house in 2003 and kept in contact with Paragon. As part of our regular reviews they contacted me in December 2006 to say the 'account' stood at £7200 told them I couldn't make a one off payment to clear this amount and they aggreed to continue with the agreed payments. In Jan 2007 Global contact us in writing to say that they had purchased the loan and demanding over £28k within 7 days! I duly contacted them and explained my understanding of the situation they stated that there was no 'documented' evidence of reduced payments and intrest being frozen. Disputed the issue and requested original copy of agreement etc as advice by other users of this site. That documentation was not forthcoming within the legal time frame, but did eventually arrive. However I contacted Paragon and asked for a copy of the letter sent in December 2006 stating the amount owed was £7200, they stated debt had been sold and thaqt I would have to request this via Global, who have not responded to the requests to suppy a copy of the letter (surprise, surprise!!!!).

 

Thropughout the process I have received letters from CBS transcom and agreed to contiued with the reduced payments via direct debit, but Copes contact me a few days afterwards threatening legal action the latest letter states: "Do not underestimate the resolve of our client in pursuing this debt", it is still in dispute as I believe that the outstanding amount is £7200 (less the payments made) they think it is now over 40K, I have asked of Global that interest is frozen but no reply and the amount is also registered with credit reference agencies.

 

Any advice etc is welcomed, i did sight a thread that considered getting sworn affidavite from people stating that they believed they had agreed finterset to be frozen, any progress on that?

Edited by DT&FE
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gu

 

 

 

Any advice etc is welcomed, i did sight a thread that considered getting sworn affidavite from people stating that they believed they had agreed finterset to be frozen, any progress on that?

 

I had Trading Standards dealing with them for a while and Transcom told them that they were no longer dealing with it and the debt would be re assigned to another collector. T S told me to contact them when there is any contact. There has been nothing for three months and weekly phone calls have stopped. I would be up for a collective defence against them as I was grossly misled in phone dealings with them n to believing the interest had been frozen

Edited by Mark26
spell
Link to post
Share on other sites

FolksJust noticed something else from the CCA (that arrived after around 4 requests and outwith the proscribed dates). It asks for "occupation details - main applicant" nothing in the boxes other than time with employer!This was a joint application and CCA also states "occupation details - joint applicant" again all the boxes are blank. Does this nullify agreement?????I do not have the legal knowledge to instigate and collate a 'collective defence' but surely some one out there has. This whole debarcle has had an impact on my dear wife's health, althoug that would be difficult to prove.There must be a gagger out there with the grey matter, resolve and time!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hi again all, I have a feeling I'm due a Summons in the next few days, I've still not had a reply from them from the letter I posted here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1667603.html

 

Can they just go for a summons?

 

They still haven't provided me with the SAR I asked for etc, I've had no phone calls, nothing since August '08

 

Might also add that at this point I've not received a Default notice from either the original creditor (Paragon) or Arrow

 

Any and all assistance is of course gratefully received!

 

Thanks.

Edited by lobo200
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well, I received a letter from Arrow today saying they received my letter in September 2008 and sorry for the delay and that they will now process my SAR and will endeavour to process it within the statute time limit. hmmmm

 

Oh, this letter had no date on it either so I'll be keeping the envelope with the post date on it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I received a letter from Arrow today saying they received my letter in September 2008 and sorry for the delay and that they will now process my Subject Access Request and will endeavour to process it within the statute time limit. hmmmm

 

Oh, this letter had no date on it either so I'll be keeping the envelope with the post date on it.

 

Oh dear!! The Statutory Time Limit has well and truly passed. They had 40 days from the receipt of your request to comply. Time to report them

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Well, I still have no default notice, no SAR, no deed of assignment, no letter of assignment from the original creditor.

 

Last week I received a letter from their solicitors threatening court action. Have replied back stating what Arrow/CBS have failed to provide.

 

Have also flagged up the fact that on each lettter received from them, the amount owed has fluctuated (I've made no payments). On top of that, Arrow are claiming the amount owed is 4x higher than the amount the original creditor had stated was required to settle the debt.

 

Will see what they come back with. Am also starting complaint procedures on the failure to supply the SAR & the fact they keep ignoring my letters and still demand payment. This has been going on for far too long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also had letter from CBS solicitors, didn t hear anything for months and now another DCA is sending me letters., back in to the big circle we go. I have sent them a recorded delivery letter telling them I will have no dealings with them by telephone as my phone dealings with Paragon caused all of the problems. I have also informed them if they want to send their agent to my home, to make an appointment so that I can arrange for my legal representative to be present. They don t appear to like puttting anything in writing ( apart from standard letters ) which makes me suspect that they don t actually look in to individual cases or disputes, and just try to use bullying tactics across the board

Edited by Mark26
spell
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi all,

 

I'm new to this so don't know whether I should be starting a new thread or not. But I'm having issues with Arrow Global so I thought this would be a good place to start.

 

I got a letter about two months ago from StevensDrakes solicitors on behalf of Arrow Global saying that they had become the new owners of the debt I had with HSBC to the tune of £10,700. This debt dates back to 1998, which started out as a loan for £5000. Having got into financial difficulties in the ensuing years, I ended up paying a number of DCAs a reduced amount every month. Then the debt seemed to drop off the radar by about 2003 or so after I'd moved a couple of times, and I'd completely forgotten about it.

 

I then got a letter from DCA Buchanan Clark & Wells in 2007 giving me a Formal Notice of Default Account, and threatening court action to recover the debt. I then sent them a S.A.R. to which I didn't get the squeak of a reply.

 

Then in February this year, I get basically the same letter from solicitors StevensDrake acting on behalf of Arrow Global. I sent them a letter claiming the Statute of Limitations. Then I got a letter in May, saying the debt was not Statute barred, since I apparently made a payment in September 2005. I've gone through bank statements, and there is no payment to anyone for £25:00 in that month.

 

What should I do now? CCA them, SAR them again, or both?

 

By the way, undying respect to you all. This site utterly rocks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...