Default 28 days ?

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Default 28 days ?

In text version:

Marvellous, thank you...I think there is even a Bank Holday within my 14 day period too...so they said before the 29th May..and I reckon they should have allowed me at least until the 4th June...

Digressing slightly ...

Like many on here who have chased unfair charges applied before the DN was issued...how does that come into play, if at all ?

In my own case, once the unfair charges were credited back (some years later) the account would not have been over the limit...but I guess the arrears would still have been there..as the charges were applied after I started missing full payments.

For those with PPI refunds for example , charged before they missed the due payments...would they have a right to state the arrears would not have built up without the incorrect PPI fees ?

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: Default 28 days ?

What company are you dealing with here? i.e. issued Default notice?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Default 28 days ?

Marvellous, thank you...I think there is even a Bank Holday within my 14 day period too...so they said before the 29th May..and I reckon they should have allowed me at least until the 4th June...

Digressing slightly ...

Like many on here who have chased unfair charges applied before the DN was issued...how does that come into play, if at all ?

In my own case, once the unfair charges were credited back (some years later) the account would not have been over the limit...but I guess the arrears would still have been there..as the charges were applied after I started missing full payments.

For those with PPI refunds for example , charged before they missed the due payments...would they have a right to state the arrears would not have built up without the incorrect PPI fees ?

Not quite sure I follow this but if you're asking about retrospective action on a decided FOR case, ie where you are put back to the position you would have been in had the incident not occurred would mean if they defaulted you then the default would also go.

In essence, if you went into charge territory because of a bank fault and then they defaulted you, but at a later date you won the refund of those charges then technically the default ought to go as well. However you'd usually have to argue this and then rely on the FOS if the bank refuse.

If that's not what you're asking, spell it out in Niddy talk please (ie plain English )

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Default 28 days ?

Not quite sure I follow this but if you're asking about retrospective action on a decided FOR case, ie where you are put back to the position you would have been in had the incident not occurred would mean if they defaulted you then the default would also go.

In essence, if you went into charge territory because of a bank fault and then they defaulted you, but at a later date you won the refund of those charges then technically the default ought to go as well. However you'd usually have to argue this and then rely on the FOS if the bank refuse.

If that's not what you're asking, spell it out in Niddy talk please (ie plain English )

'Niddy talk' ? You got the gist of that okay...sorry it seemed vague.

[Enforcer]

Re: Default 28 days ?

Regarding default notices, and "defective" default notices.

Am I right in thinking that a default notice can only be sent out for a valid, executed, regulated agreement. If there is an improperly executed agreement then they should not be able to issue a default notice.

Is this perhaps why we see so many "defective" defaults served. OC has realised that account is UE so sends "defective" in an attempt to mislead and deceive alleged debtor?

[SXGuy]

Re: Default 28 days ?

I dont think thats the case, Default Notices are sent out regardless of improperly executed agreements. Remember most banks either dont know, or hide the fact that some accounts are improperly executed.

In most cases, its only when challeneged at court, will there be a conclusion that an agreement is improperly executed.

A default notice, is a reflection on how the account has been ran, its not a reflection of the enforceablity of it.

To get a removal of a DN on the grounds of whether the agreement is improperly executed, would require a challenge in court as to the execution of said agreement.

The reason for invalid DN's being served, is simply a case of error, non understanding of the rules or simply disregarding the rules on the part of the bank.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Default 28 days ?

And as we know from McGuffick (v Harrison) as the data is accurate it can stay (credit files).

[gravytrain]

Re: Default 28 days ?

I think it is more to do with the fact that some creditors have an endemic inability to get their paperwork right.

There are cases where the section 87 notices are being used in a way that they are not intended though(sorry off topic).

PDL companies have a habit of sending these, even though they are not required, the official sounding format and the deadline for "enforcement" is so much more intimidating to the uninitiated than a conventional LBA. Mostly of course they cannot/ do not enforce, so they need all the leverage they can get.

[gravytrain]

Re: Default 28 days ?

I dont think thats the case, Default Notices are sent out regardless of improperly executed agreements. Remember most banks either dont know, or hide the fact that some accounts are improperly executed.

In most cases, its only when challeneged at court, will there be a conclusion that an agreement is improperly executed.

A default notice, is a reflection on how the account has been ran, its not a reflection of the enforceablity of it.

To get a removal of a DN on the grounds of whether the agreement is improperly executed, would require a challenge in court as to the execution of said agreement.

The reason for invalid DN's being served, is simply a case of error, non understanding of the rules or simply disregarding the rules on the part of the bank.

You would be surprised at the amount of trouble some have in understanding this.

[cardiac arrest]

Re: Default 28 days ?

You would be surprised at the amount of trouble some have in understanding this.

Indeed..even the application by the bank of unfair fees/interest ...doesn't really impact on a DN which is issued if you have missed the payments, unless you can argue the fees etc resulted directly in not being able to pay the required amounts each month.. For example those with PPI claims which have accumulated on the account to such an extent that the amount due is subsequently unaffordable, may be able to argue the case that a DN wouldn't have arisen otherwise...but I suppose you would have to do the maths and see if this was true first.