Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

This could be groundbreaking stuff Paul.

No it can't.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

No mate, that is not right at all. You're way off the mark with this assumption that you think you have a right to affect the true standing of an account status - you don't.

The ONLY way you can get a default wiped in this manner is if you went to court and got the judge to deem it UE within the period of last payment made and next payment due.

Irrespective of the legal status of the account the lender has every right to add data to the CRA's that stipulates the true conduct of account and if you miss one payment then the lender can default you.

I'll argue this all day, sorry mate I worked for the CRA's remember plus the ICO is quite clear on it.

[PlanB]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

Utter bollocks

McGuffick merely addressed reporting as enforcement.

The point is , if the Court orders the agreement unenforceable , to quote Lord Hoffman "The Debtor does not have to pay"

So the debtor under an "irredeemably unenforceable contract" may decide as is his right, to say get fcuked to the creditor.

Now if he does yes the creditor can report that the debtor didnt pay, however he must also in my view state that the contract was unenforceable per the courts order otherwise he isnt reporting accurately.

This could be groundbreaking stuff Paul. Are you suggesting that the creditor has to admit that the only reason the debtor didn't pay the outstanding balance is because he wasn't legally obliged to pay

This could cause two reactions to anyone reading the file. Firstly, does that mean the account holder could be seen as a debt "avoider" Secondly, the creditor would rather remove the whole entry (I presume it's not obligatory to report to CRAs) rather than let the whole world know that they created an UE agreement in case others decide to give-it-a-go too

[mgfboy]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

I suppose the real question is even if CRA where to put default ( unenforceable agreement) on the file would it make a blind bit of difference to if you can get credit or not.

Lets face it the only reason we care is because of that?????

[Paul.]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

Paul,

Sorry mate - maybe you're confused (or I am) but we're speaking about a default entry on a credit file thus the enforceability status does not matter one iota as the basis of registering a default with the CRA's is plainly laid out and quite simply, 'is it a true reflection of the account conduct' - yes ergo the default notice stays.

McGuffick paved the way for this as you know.

There is no UE status for reporting data within CRA's as technically, until court you did not have any such declaration thus the true reflection of the account was a default.

Utter bollocks

McGuffick merely addressed reporting as enforcement.

The point is , if the Court orders the agreement unenforceable , to quote Lord Hoffman "The Debtor does not have to pay"

So the debtor under an "irredeemably unenforceable contract" may decide as is his right, to say get fcuked to the creditor.

Now if he does yes the creditor can report that the debtor didnt pay, however he must also in my view state that the contract was unenforceable per the courts order otherwise he isnt reporting accurately.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

Paul,

Sorry mate - maybe you're confused (or I am) but we're speaking about a default entry on a credit file thus the enforceability status does not matter one iota as the basis of registering a default with the CRA's is plainly laid out and quite simply, 'is it a true reflection of the account conduct' - yes ergo the default notice stays.

McGuffick paved the way for this as you know.

There is no UE status for reporting data within CRA's as technically, until court you did not have any such declaration thus the true reflection of the account was a default (which simply means you defaulted on the agreement by missing more than one payment - which is all that is required to get a default).

[Paul.]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

Does the face that it was not enforceable in court have any impact?

yes it does, and heres why.

The creditor may have the entitlement to state you are in default but he must also state that the agreement is unenforceable and therefore you are merely exercising your statutory right with an unenforceable agreement to not pay.

The Creditor has a duty to accurately process data therefore it must say UE in my view

This argument has prevailed a few times when ive had to deploy it

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

Haha

Niddy pops into admin. searched user uploads and found the file then the link

--> Studio - allaboutFORUMS

Should answer things for you

Extra post here --> Last payment date - Page 2 - allaboutFORUMS

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

I'm on phone. I'll hunt for my post tmw and link it. But basically it explained the process and I uploaded technical guidance .pdf from oft regards defaults and the issuing of them.

Arghhhh can't find it now

[cymruambyth]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

Thanks. This is something that I have basically ignored but as most companies defaulted in 2003/4 then they should have all cleared.
I think some companies delay putting the default on your account even though the DN has been issued just to prolong their control.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

None.

I've posted loads about this

I'll try find link with uploaded PDF on guidance for defaults.

BRB

[cymruambyth]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

Does the face that it was not enforceable in court have any impact?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Defaults After Court Case Dismissed

one debt = one default. If you have proof it was defaulted (on CRA) back then, it would have vanished forever in 2009. For it to still be there means you must prove to the CRA it's the same debt as a previously defaulted one by the same bank whatever.

Easy to resolve or threaten court

[cymruambyth]

OH went to court with Rob Way in Feb 2011; I've just done a CRA check with Noodle and it shows that this is being defaulted every month. Is this correct, also original account default was in 2003?