Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I posted a couple of years ago about our debt situation and have been trying to pay off our debt as best we can. It is a possibility I maybe made redundant in a few months time, so I am trying to find out everything I can about what happens in today’s world when you can’t pay. I keep finding conflicting advice on various sites so I wanted to post this quote to get thoughts. It claims basically that the dca will likely get enforceable documents these days and therefore it’s likely you will have to pay dca at some point during the 6 year process.    on here I read a lot of comments assuming the exact opposite of this. A lot of the threads on here state the beginning of the process but I never see conclusive stuff about what happened from start to finish to get insight into whether debts post 2015 have been enforced etc. I hear a lot here not to pay dca companies but most my debts are post 2015 debts I am all up to date on our debts but if I lose my job it is likely I’ll end up where I tried to avoid in the first place. Which is destroying our files and dealing with DCA. I’ll post it below so you can see what I mean.   It is likely that any debts incurred after 2007 will end up with all the documentation being provided and being enforceable. Therefore you should use the time while awaiting responses going through your Income & Expenditure and considering any possiblity of making a full and final settlement. It can take a number of months to reach the stage of a hearing date and exchange of witness statements and normally you would be able to settle or come to an arrangement to pay before the court hearing, once documents have been provided, although this isn’t guaranteed.
    • depends who said sols state their client is. IDRWW vis~IDR(worldWide) are a debt collector regulated & registered in the UK & USA    they are not solicitors. they use various 'for hire' - here use our letterhead paper tiger solicitors. its just a case of who's stupid enough to join their folly. IDR law used to be their fav but they lost do much money, they broke ties after almost being struck off and now do Will/Probate disputes only. IDR Legal are their sols wing. moriarty law Judge and priestly Taheel - a foreign DCA that use absolutely any trick in the book to extort money even pretending to be any of the above inc being the bank themselves in phone calls.           
  • 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

SLC Cannot Supply The Original Agreement


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5479 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

Thanks for the clarification of the difference. My original question still stands, what if an agreement only specifies the APR and not the original interest? Can APR be used to satisfy the need to have interest on an agreement? If an agreement only makes reference to APR and not interest, is the prescribed item of interest fulfilled or not?

 

Hi

 

No the interest rate must be shown as a % per annum.

 

The APR must also be shown as it shows the Total Charge for Credit which might include other charges.

 

So no interest rate = totally unenforceable

No APR = unenforceable without a court order.

 

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

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hey i just said APR wasn't a PT which it isnt and like everything else i write on here just lately somebody, rather than check if i am right first jumps on their keyboard and starts to infer i am making it up or something .

 

This has hapened about 6 times now and each time i have had to waste time proviing information that is quite available for any one to find.

 

I am not trying to boost my ego here i am just trying to make sure that the people reading this site are given correct information.

 

 

Peter

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Peter, so if my agreement only says "I agree to be bound by the terms and condition attahced" but the sig box mentions nothing about the amount of interest, the amount of credit card balance etc then it is unenforcable even with a court order, is that right?

 

That is not what i said i said that APR is not a prescribed term and a agrement can be enforced without it allbeing with the aproval of the court. Interest charged is a prescribed term different things.

Peter

 

Hi Peter,

 

Sorry for any misunderstandings- it has sunken in now and I get it!!

 

Thanks, as ever!! :)

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

But a large TUT TUT to both of you for argueing such a rediculously small point sooooooo strongly and confusing all who were reading it. Both of you could have just said you were arguing over the difference between APR and Interest

 

You're both Naughty and should sit on the naughty step for 5 minutes :mad: (:D )

 

 

Ahhh...so it wasn't just me then? I thought I was going mad!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

But a large TUT TUT to both of you for argueing such a rediculously small point sooooooo strongly and confusing all who were reading it. Both of you could have just said you were arguing over the difference between APR and Interest

 

You're both Naughty and should sit on the naughty step for 5 minutes :mad: (:D )

 

Hi

 

We were actually arguing over whether APR was a prescribed term which I think is quite important because I had noticed some members stating that the APR was not present so the agreement was totally unenforceable.

 

I initially thought that this was correct so may have advised people accordingly if 'He Who is Now Looking Very Smug' :D had not corrected me.

 

Sorry if any confusion was caused but we do now have a definitive answer to that issue at least!

 

P.S Shan't sit on the naughty step! :(

 

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

Hey i just said APR wasn't a PT which it isnt and like everything else i write on here just lately somebody, rather than check if i am right first jumps on their keyboard and starts to infer i am making it up or something .

 

This has hapened about 6 times now and each time i have had to waste time proviing information that is quite available for any one to find.

 

I am not trying to boost my ego here i am just trying to make sure that the people reading this site are given correct information.

 

 

Peter

 

 

And, it is much appreciated Peter - it just takes me a while sometimes to get my head around it - the bank in question keep stalling and dragging their feet, and this seems too simple a thing to make the whole agreement unenforcable so I like to make sure I understand it completely before taking action....

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey i just said APR wasn't a PT which it isnt and like everything else i write on here just lately somebody, rather than check if i am right first jumps on their keyboard and starts to infer i am making it up or something .

 

This has hapened about 6 times now and each time i have had to waste time proviing information that is quite available for any one to find.

 

I am not trying to boost my ego here i am just trying to make sure that the people reading this site are given correct information.

 

 

Peter

 

U talkin' 'bout me? :|

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

HI

As a small appology for my outburst i have an illustation of APR you might find enlightening.

Suppose you borrow £120, repayable in instalments of £40 at monthly intervals. The lender charges an up-front fee of £5 for his services. Note that the repayments add up to £120 so the annual interest rate is zero. Yes, an interest-free loan! There is a non-zero APR, though, due to the fee which makes the total repayment £125. That small up-front fee, when applied to a three-month loan, gives an APR of a whopping 29.2 per cent.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

No the interest rate must be shown as a % per annum.

 

The APR must also be shown as it shows the Total Charge for Credit which might include other charges.

 

So no interest rate = totally unenforceable

No APR = unenforceable without a court order.

 

Regards, Pam

 

So, to muddy the waters, what if the agreement only quotes APR, and not a simple %age rate?

 

Cheers

 

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

I initially thought that this was correct so may have advised people accordingly if 'He Who is Now Looking Very Smug' :grin: had not corrected me

 

Thats woman speak for i was wrong and i don't now how to look smug;)

 

Peter

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I initially thought that this was correct so may have advised people accordingly if 'He Who is Now Looking Very Smug' :grin: had not corrected me

 

Thats woman speak for i was wrong and i don't now how to look smug;)

 

Peter

 

lol

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael, I've already asked that one. No interest rate, no prescribed term present, not enforceable

 

D'oh - sorry, I just saw that was the question that Pam replied to in the message I quoted! :oops::oops::oops:

Time I went home I think :D

 

Cheers

 

Michael

Please note that the right to reproduce any part of any post I make on this forum is restricted under copyright law.

 

Please see the following copyright statement

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thats woman speak for i was wrong and i don't now how to look smug;)

 

Peter

 

Okay, Okay!

 

I WAS WRONG!

 

Is that better? :p:)

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

HI Pam

 

I am not one to gloat i have however printed your last post and am off to the shops to buy a nice frame, it will go next to my swimming certificate(5Meter's impressed eh.)

Peter

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

HOT OFF THE PRESS!!!

 

Just got off the phone to Information Commissioners Office.

 

Apparently a lender does not require any agreement for processing your data, so if people are requesting agreements for a loan or cc and the lender is unable to produce this, they are quite within their right to report the account activity to the CRA's.

 

Hmm....I think we need to get to the bottom of this - as soon as you get it in writing, let us know.

 

How can they have a legitimate interest in an agreement that is not enforcable and has been "executed" illegally?

 

I don't have access to a dictionary here, but legitimate means lawful surely? Therefore, for agreements that are not enforcable, surely this does stand?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Be aware that even if an agreement is unenforceable, there is still a contract. This is the issue here. Only the agreement is stalled, maybe the Information Commissioners Office are using that bit in their rational ( not sure?)

 

But, what if the agreement has been set up unenforcably ie. no prescribed terms - the agreement doesn;t even exist then, surely?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

The agreement may not exist, but you took the cash, or you bought stuff on the card, therefore a contract remains. Just as an unenforceable debt still exists, the contract between them and us is still present.

 

(as far as I can remember)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently a lender does not require any agreement for processing your data, so if people are requesting agreements for a loan or cc and the lender is unable to produce this, they are quite within their right to report the account activity to the CRA's.

 

Absolute nonsense.

 

Peter

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pam did you look up the credit card cancellation issue??

 

Trying to be a gentleman here.:p

 

Peter

  • Haha 1

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...