Heading the Right Way!

[The Debt Star]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Yes mate I do have and will get it up onsite Just with other things you know and getting active in the forums it has slipped the priority list a bit.

F & Fs are really not the simple things that people think they are. The crux is that the mechanism is DECEPTIVELY simple. It is Contract Law not Statute Law and that brings a lot of baggage with it. Never mind that CCA1974/2006 regulates the agreement that is irrelevant you are bartering an accounting asset at this point just as if it is being sold on by an OC. Does the DCA own the debt in Absolute? If not they are also irrelevant in the loop. Deal only with the OC and in fact as I found out cos I had sols do it you do not even have to get their agreement in the first place. Don't even mark the third party cheques with anything, peopl that tell to do it are wrong. cover it all in the letters acco,pnying therefore if they are paid into the correct accounts the creditor can then NEVER declare that he had not read the correspondence can he? HMRC v Fry cannot then be quoted against you i.e large organisations remove all cheques and cash them prior to reading the documents. Just a few practical tips.

It is not yours or my fault if the cretins get it wrong.

"it matters not what the creditor intends but what he has led the debtor to believe!" LLoyd LJ Court of Appeal (Stour Valley Builders) and that in a case which fell by the way for other reasons.
regards
Garlok

Know what? That is the BEST advice I've ever had on this subject. Thank you. I will follow that through and see what happens!

You recommend pulling a sly one and sending 10% what's to stop me sending them a fiver?

[garlok]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Yes mate I do have and will get it up onsite Just with other things you know and getting active in the forums it has slipped the priority list a bit.

F & Fs are really not the simple things that people think they are. The crux is that the mechanism is DECEPTIVELY simple. It is Contract Law not Statute Law and that brings a lot of baggage with it. Never mind that CCA1974/2006 regulates the agreement that is irrelevant you are bartering an accounting asset at this point just as if it is being sold on by an OC. Does the DCA own the debt in Absolute? If not they are also irrelevant in the loop. Deal only with the OC and in fact as I found out cos I had sols do it you do not even have to get their agreement in the first place. Don't even mark the third party cheques with anything, peopl that tell to do it are wrong. cover it all in the letters acco,pnying therefore if they are paid into the correct accounts the creditor can then NEVER declare that he had not read the correspondence can he? HMRC v Fry cannot then be quoted against you i.e large organisations remove all cheques and cash them prior to reading the documents. Just a few practical tips.

It is not yours or my fault if the cretins get it wrong.

"it matters not what the creditor intends but what he has led the debtor to believe!" LLoyd LJ Court of Appeal (Stour Valley Builders) and that in a case which fell by the way for other reasons.
regards
Garlok

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Seconded get it up man !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards

[The Debt Star]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Garlok, would be good to see ya blue man avatar thingy. you still got that? fly the flag dude!

[The Debt Star]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Cheers Garlok. It would be very interesting to know how many 10% F&Fs are accepted. I made a 50% F&F to CapQuest last year on a £7K debt, ex-CCCS DMP, which has been on-going since 2005, minimum payments, interest frozen and with a maturity date sometime in the 25th Century The DCA rejected it, saying it was insufficient. They were looking for 75%. So my experience of low F&Fs isn't very happy but it would be real interesting to know what others are experiencing.

[garlok]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

I've just noted a comment in a previous post DS about IVAs and DMPs etc. I have been derided for this and some stupid comments made about our sols in another place BUT in the very first discussion/conversation I had with them I was told NEVER get involved at all with Tomlin orders, IVAs DMPs etc. Most of these sort of arrangements at some stage will collapse and leave you further in debt than when you first started. In the light of recent happenings with these sorts of programmes and associated scandals, they were right.

That is proper professional advice bought and paid for from litigation specialists in this field. In the light of further progress we have made with them they will always wait , prepare to ambush the OC if they dare to go to court, if it does come worst to worst (unlikely if I put with a trashed CRF they have no legal substance)) I was told they would get a 10% F&F which they have proved on another matter.

regards
Garlok

[garlok]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Absolutely PF. therefore whilst some would disagree this should be exploited as much they exploit us. It is perfectly legal with the full authority of their Lordships in the C of A. get it worng they lost Oh dear oh dear (LOL)

regards
Garlok

[pompeyfaith]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Garlok,

I had that at the co-op whilst one dept (customer services) was dealing with my PPI Claim another (collections) was hounding me for payments which I was not going to do why should I pay them a penny when they where holding 9k of my funds.

The point I am making is they do not communicate with each other and that is why a complaint can take so long.

Regards

[The Debt Star]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

True, 'tis true.

[garlok]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Also DS there are several methods of dealing with a lot of debt which do fall outside the normal paths. Niddy has explained his case. But you can always try for an F & F we saved about 9.5K with a 10% settlement. it is a case of understanding where you are coming from and making a target of what you wish to achieve. in our case I pulled my pension fund on ill health grounds just to clear up and tick one box fully expecting to pay more. I studied the routine and asked our sols if they would handle it, they did and that was the result. Still have the blessed card battle though.

However most of these type of successes are achieved because of the weak systemic management structure within the financial insttitutions. i.e. the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, until it all ends up in a row and they wake up too late which in this case proved conduct and accord as per C of A Lloyd LJ and others.

regards
Garlok

[caspar]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Hey DS,

No intention of shooting you down in flames - even apologised for misleading people if I had! You're absolutely correct it is unusual, very unusual, but also is not unheard of.

I'd also like to say there are a lot of people in a similar situation to me, maybe through different reasons, but nevertheless leaving the same end result, and there is no reason why they shouldn't give it a go. The view I take is if you don't ask, you won't get. If you do ask, they may still say no, but they might say yes.

For anyone with no real assets to speak of, and there are plenty of us around, there is certainly no harm in trying.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Hi

Ok I agree, no it is not routinely possible to wipe tens of thousands, but it is possible in minority cases. Apologies if I made it sound easy; it's not so much "easy" as being a predator and to be frank you're right; whilst it "can" be done it is not, by a long shot, a daily occurrence.

Cheers mate

[The Debt Star]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

Fairy nuff mate, ur the expert, I most certainly am not. But, if I'm thinking that you and Caspar are making it sound easy and routinely possible to strike out tens of thousands without paying lenders anything then its a sure bet that others will be thinking likewise.

But TBH that was the response I knew you'd post. So, if it really is the case that average Joe Debtor can kiss goodbye to £61K without considering bankruptcy or an IVA then great, no false hopes will be raised on here to be dashed later on.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

as I said "for most debtors." look, all I'm trying to say - and I'm being bleedin' shot down in flames over it - is that having "massive" amounts of debt in the tens of thousands written off without going bankrupt or going on an IVA is not, for the most part, the sort of experience that debtors have. Some do, sure. Not this one any road. Ergo, if there are exceptional circumstances for the massive debt sweeps described above then posters should state what that background is, not just "I've had X million written off this year. Give me a sticker." Rather, "I've had X million written off this year and that was because 90% of it was irrecoverable because of X, Y and Z reasons." If thats an unreasonable point, my apologies to all.

I helped wipe £61k off cos i'm more clued up than the person I spoke with at HBOS and for no other reason than that!

Its the truth! He agreed to send me a letter with certain wording, upon receipt it was confirmed the debt was written off as a business loss; even though this wasn't what we originally set out to do but once they put the idea to us, we jumped on it and answered in accordance with what he'd already told me, would allow a write off in totality!

I wasn't shooting you down in flames, in fact nobody was! We were just pointing out that NO two scenarios are the same, it'd be almost impossible to get two identical scenarios so we always treat each as specific and unique, therefore I never thought spelling it out was necessary

[The Debt Star]

Re: Heading the Right Way!

as I said "for most debtors." look, all I'm trying to say - and I'm being bleedin' shot down in flames over it - is that having "massive" amounts of debt in the tens of thousands written off without going bankrupt or going on an IVA is not, for the most part, the sort of experience that debtors have. Some do, sure. Not this one any road. Ergo, if there are exceptional circumstances for the massive debt sweeps described above then posters should state what that background is, not just "I've had X million written off this year. Give me a sticker." Rather, "I've had X million written off this year and that was because 90% of it was irrecoverable because of X, Y and Z reasons." If thats an unreasonable point, my apologies to all.