Default removed, but then...

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Default removed, but then...

See this is the thing, if the refund won't touch the sides of the debt - why bother?

Surely chasing UE and ignoring the reclaim part is best here?

That's what I'd be doing. If they get heavy I'd then look to re-reclaim using new figures and interest rates.

Just my view on it

Thanks Niddy..I think this is to 'tickle' out the DN situation really. Is it worth stating to the OC that the DN was not in fact miss-issued at all, and they have misunderstood my earlier letter ? Trying to think ahead of what their options are if they leave the DN in place as opposed to re-issuing and make the account live... either way doesn't impact on the CRA entry, but I'm worried about them making the account live and banging on interest charges until I default again

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Default removed, but then...

I thought the reclaim was a done deal ?

I thought we were talking about damage limitation.
Perhaps I should read the whole thread.

The reclaim is agreed, but the implications of the OC's proposed methodology may have a negative impact in other areas, ie the UE we have

[gravytrain]

Re: Default removed, but then...

The reclaim is agreed, but the implications of the OC's proposed methodology may have a negative impact in other areas, ie the UE we have

I think the agreement would be unenforceable whatever, the issue is the default date on your file and the implications to the default balance, although if your not going to pay it anyway i suppose that is a moot point.

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Default removed, but then...

Okay. I think what I might do is write to the OC about the DN issue, just to clarify that they have got it wrong when they said it was incorrectly issued. No one ever said is was a problem over my receiving it. If they choose to carry on anyway, at least they will have to come up with another excuse for going down this line and won't be able to claim they did not know.

I agree Niddy, the reclaim has, as events have unfolded afterwards, become a side issue to UE, it's just unfortunate they came together at the same time......I'm not sure how I might stop them applying it now though.

However, if they do re-issue the DN, and I successfully claim it is satisfied by application of the refund against the arrears...what then ? They have terminated incorrectly in retrospect...but do i want to go there...probably not..

So, you think a letter about the DN and leave it at that, not mentioning the arrears payment at all ?

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Default removed, but then...

Talk about coincidences...In my mail this morning was an Annual Statement from Hillesden (the DCA)..never had one of these before....

but it shows that the refund has been made against the account on 24.12.2009 (?) spooky that ...they surely mean 2012.....so that's gone ahead without the OC taking the account back...confused ? I surely am...

Interestingly though, the statement does not include any of the payments I have made since 2010, just the last two late in 2012...wonder what happened to my money ?

Obviously the amount on the statement is wrong, so maybe at some date in the future I might point this out to them...depending on what happens next.

This thread is sort of running in tandem with my Diary, so I will update that and eventually when this particular issue has resolved itself, everything will revert back to being posted under Cardios' Diary.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Default removed, but then...

Ok so they've retrospectively added the refund. That's normal.

Go for UE and see what that brings. If they go legal you have a lot to build a defence out of.

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Default removed, but then...

Ok so they've retrospectively added the refund. That's normal.

Go for UE and see what that brings. If they go legal you have a lot to build a defence out of.

Thanks Niddy...I sent an email to the OC (its the customer services dept that have dealt with this so far)..it was simply to state about the DN having actually been received okay and that they must have misunderstood what I said earlier about the Notification of Assignment.


Is this all okay so far...I intend to sit tight now and not 'poke around the wasps nest with a stick' anymore

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Default removed, but then...

Okay, have sat tight for a while on this, but last week the adjudicator rang me to discuss the complaint made to FOS. While he did agree Sainsbury's had acted without 'positivity and sympathetically' and handled the claim 'poorly', the FOS felt the refund of all the charges (£1,347.21) plus a bit of compo was satisfactory recompense, and thus my 'complaint' was not upheld. The FOS agreed the DN should remain in place as it was in fact received by me..(it has 18 months to go on my CRA file). Sainsbury's also agreed to leave the DN as was, so that's sorted.

Interestingly, the FOS did say a new DN could have been issued, and new CRA entry made starting at day ! (ie with 6 years to run), despite this resulting in a CRA entry for a single account being on file for 10.5 years... Anyway, we've swerved round that one.

The FOS mentioned the account was now with Blair Oliver Scott (again), but I have not had any notification about this, so just sitting tight.

The outcome ? Well , I got mad, I know...I felt badly let down and got angry Sainsbury's charged me all that stuff 6 years ago...now it's all been paid back, and an admittance by Sainsbury's that they could have helped me more..and a mild reprimand for them from the FOS (which I can maybe use later).

We now go back to UE...and of course the DN is still defective, a CCA request is still outstanding and DCA (DLC) have bitten the dust....for now.