Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Ok thanks for that, well spotted and all duly noted. Yes they did eventually submit those docs to me after a second letter advising them I was contacting the ICO to make a formal complaint for failing to comply with an earlier SAR that they brushed off as an "administrative error" or something. When I sent the letter telling them I was in contact with the information commissioner to lodge the complaint, the original PCN etc quickly followed along with their excuse!
    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
  • 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

What do DCAs pay for a debt?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5989 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

TVM,

"DCA employees probably wonder how debt avoiders sleep at night."

 

A lot of people who suffer financial difficulties through no fault of their own visit this site for help and support from caring, generous people.

 

[edit]

 

Mod Note: Please refrain from making personal attacks

The only man who sticks closer to you in adversity than a friend is a creditor.

 

Debt Collection Charges

 

There is no legal basis for a creditor or a debt collection agency acting on its behalf to claim collection costs from a debtor unless there is an express provision in the original agreement.

 

Without such provision, collection charges cannot be demanded as a debt due under the agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TVM

 

Just like you have been on other threads!

  • Haha 1

The only man who sticks closer to you in adversity than a friend is a creditor.

 

Debt Collection Charges

 

There is no legal basis for a creditor or a debt collection agency acting on its behalf to claim collection costs from a debtor unless there is an express provision in the original agreement.

 

Without such provision, collection charges cannot be demanded as a debt due under the agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please remember that it is against forum rules to make a verbal/post/attack upon any other user.

 

Moreso though, the Site Helpers & Moderating team are all unpaid volunteers.

 

Please remember this when venting any anger against any moderation that may occur. :)

 

Let's all be nice to each other.. :D

 

Regards, Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the few months I've been a CAGger I've formed the view that the majority of posters just wish to reclaim fines levied by their bank, with the next biggest group genuinely seeking help to pay off their debts at a rate they can reasonably afford.

 

There are a few - very few in my opinion - looking to avoid their responsibilities plus the odd nutter here and there.

 

As far as I am concerned I try to offer guidance to someone most days.

 

I don't look for gratitude (but the occasional reputation click is gratifying!) but I don't need moralists preaching from on high either.

 

Even as I write I wonder how x and y are managing, and whether I managed to help them in some small way.

 

And, as Mrs. Van would tell you, I am not a pompous do-gooder either.

 

To quote Alexander Dumas, "One for all, and all for one"

 

And that was written long before Britain became the rip-off, sleazy country it has now become.

 

Vandermerwe

Link to post
Share on other sites

"There are a few - very few in my opinion - looking to avoid their responsibilities plus the odd nutter here and there".

 

If only that were true! Most (not all) debt is caused by persons seeking to have a lifestyle they want but cannot afford. How many debtors debts are caused by overspending on food, heating etc? How much by clamouring the designer clothes, nice cars, nice drugs, nice houses etc etc.

 

Ask a bailiff how many poor unfortunate debtors have plasma screens and a nice sky package. Most is the correct answer.

 

OK the banks and the credit card companies tempt you, but you dont have to say yes. Taking the money and not paying it back is no different to taking ANYTHING and not paying or giving it back. Its theft simple as that!

 

Yes those in debt due to illness, unemployment etc should be given sympathy. As for the rest? Why sympathise at all?

Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC NEWS | Business | Zambia loses 'vulture fund' case

 

buy for 2 million sue for 42 million !

=====================

 

may i suggest that a copy of the link below be forwarded as part of any defence to give the court an insight into "what dca's pay for a debt"

 

"even a country isn't safe"

 

Oxfam GB :: Vulture fund must not take cash from Zambia, say campaigners

Tam Wing Chuen -v- Bank of Credit and Commerce Hong Kong Ltd [1996] 2 BCLC 69

 

1996

PC

Lord Mustill Commonwealth,

 

Lord Mustill discussed the need to construe a contract contra preferentem: "the basis of the contra proferentem principle is that the person who puts forward the wording of a proposed agreement may be assumed to have looked after his own interests, so that if words leave room for doubt about whether he is intended to have a particular benefit there is reason to suppose that he is not."

Link to post
Share on other sites

The term "vulture" fund is used to describe investment companies that circle round very poor countries at a time when they are renegotiating unpayable debts, often run up by a previous, corrupt regime.

The funds buy up the debt on international markets at way below its face value and then try to enforce collection of the debt at full face value plus interest. The debt is usually cheap because in most cases there is little expectation it will ever be repaid.

In this case, Zambia's original debt of $30m was offered for redemption by Romania for $3m but bought by Donegal for nearly $4m. Donegal then persuaded Zambia to agree to pay $15m, a figure since inflated by legal costs and interest to what Donegal says is more than $50m.

Tam Wing Chuen -v- Bank of Credit and Commerce Hong Kong Ltd [1996] 2 BCLC 69

 

1996

PC

Lord Mustill Commonwealth,

 

Lord Mustill discussed the need to construe a contract contra preferentem: "the basis of the contra proferentem principle is that the person who puts forward the wording of a proposed agreement may be assumed to have looked after his own interests, so that if words leave room for doubt about whether he is intended to have a particular benefit there is reason to suppose that he is not."

Link to post
Share on other sites

"In 2002, Gordon Brown told the United Nations that the vulture funds were perverse and immoral. "

 

"We particularly condemn the perversity where vulture funds purchase debt at a reduced price and make a profit from suing the debtor country to recover the full amount owed - a morally outrageous outcome."

 

I reckon our Gordon should be looking a little closer to home in his quest to be seen as a guardian of the poor

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...