Elephant in the room

[gravytrain]

Re: Elephant in the room

Quite.

If you give a man a fire, he may be warm for a day.

Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.

Good old CC , never let a cliche go by, quite right too

[still looking]

Re: Elephant in the room

agreed jon1965, exactly my position. I knew nothing of consumer law and have had the same response as you, 9 have sent back saying no agreement can't enforce, I use Niddy's template's as just a general guide, I do change them to meet my circumstances and if I am unsure of anything then I ask for advice on here, to be honest a CCJ does not bother me at all, my credit file is wrecked as I am still paying a few creditors on small amounts who did not sell it on to the vile greedy financial groups who make a massive amount out of peoples miss-fortune.

I agree with most people, the annoying template letters I use to get from DCA's so I try and personalise mine. I do reply to every letter from a DCA and scan and back up that correspondence so that when I am corresponding with whoever on the debt I have my facts in front of me.

I have only ever claimed UE when the said company have said NO AGREEMENT WE CANT ENFORCE, Debenhams sent back a CCA from the 90's it was perfect according to NIDDY so we came to a agreement. Cabot are the ones who try it on with ( you were paying the debt so you acknowledge debt pay up ) then a few letters between us and they acknowledge there up the creek without a paddle.

I hope Paul I don't need your service's but when I first read some of this post it sounded as if Judges were granting CCJ's for companies even though they had no agreements pre 2007, further reading shows that it is about technicalities and missing T&C's my heart did miss a beat when I read the first few. !!!!!!!!

[Paul.]

Re: Elephant in the room

agreed jon1965, exactly my position. I knew nothing of consumer law and have had the same response as you, 9 have sent back saying no agreement can't enforce, I use Niddy's template's as just a general guide, I do change them to meet my circumstances and if I am unsure of anything then I ask for advice on here, to be honest a CCJ does not bother me at all, my credit file is wrecked as I am still paying a few creditors on small amounts who did not sell it on to the vile greedy financial groups who make a massive amount out of peoples miss-fortune.

I agree with most people, the annoying template letters I use to get from DCA's so I try and personalise mine. I do reply to every letter from a DCA and scan and back up that correspondence so that when I am corresponding with whoever on the debt I have my facts in front of me.

I have only ever claimed UE when the said company have said NO AGREEMENT WE CANT ENFORCE, Debenhams sent back a CCA from the 90's it was perfect according to NIDDY so we came to a agreement. Cabot are the ones who try it on with ( you were paying the debt so you acknowledge debt pay up ) then a few letters between us and they acknowledge there up the creek without a paddle.

I hope Paul I don't need your service's but when I first read some of this post it sounded as if Judges were granting CCJ's for companies even though they had no agreements pre 2007, further reading shows that it is about technicalities and missing T&C's my heart did miss a beat when I read the first few. !!!!!!!!

debenhams?

Is this a GE money account? ie a store card which was transfered to credit card?

Debs had a number of troubles with their agreeements, see Santander v Mayhew so id be interested to get a look at that agreement

[gravytrain]

Re: Elephant in the room

I hope Paul I don't need your service's but when I first read some of this post it sounded as if Judges were granting CCJ's for companies even though they had no agreements pre 2007, further reading shows that it is about technicalities and missing T&C's my heart did miss a beat when I read the first few. !!!!!!!!

It is of course possible for creditors to enforce in the absence of an agreement, he would have to show that on the balance of probabilities an agreement was signed.

This seems currently to be an option creditors are not willing to take, the trick would be to maintain that no agreement was signed, or that there was some irregularity in the terms in the defense.

[jon1965]

Re: Elephant in the room

Of course if you don't submit a defence you will get a ccj. As for ccjs i have two that i am not paying. When asked for details barclays could not find any and their "legal"arm said they couldn't enforce. it as it was so old. Actually i suspect there are some irregularities. The other one is for a massive 250 and i have had one letter or maybe two since i stopped paying a year ago. If i am honest nothing would make me happier than to receive a SD

[still looking]

Re: Elephant in the room

Paul it was a store card never changed from when I took it out in 98. its only a few hundred in the grand scheme of things, though I have PPI on it and they are refusing to refund, so I am going to just knock the amount I have worked out off the bill and stop paying.

[still looking]

Re: Elephant in the room

I keep wishing the same Jon, my house as been repoed and it has a secured loan on it for £40k plus any shortfall, I have me BR money saved up so really don't give a Rodent's rectum to be honest. Mid 50's a job that does not need you to be squeaky clean in the financial front also my landlord is me best mate and told him when I took tenancy I would be going BR.

[MrsD]

Re: Elephant in the room

ue is a last resort for most peeps, it's hard and you have to live on your wits for six years/five in Scotland. People who go down the UE route are brave,but do it because they've run out of other options and are prepared to stand up and be counted on behalf of themselves and their families. loads of posters look at UE and think they would love to be brave enough but aren't, so buckle to endless DMPs/IVAs etc(just look at a couple of pages of MSE DFW.

the templates work fine in the early stages, we are very careful about making sure posters have the right help to produce a good papertrail should the worst happen.

But the moot point here is
most posters can't afford a solicitor, especially in the early stages.
most posters don't want a huge technical fight with a creditor, they want to keep the whole business at arms length, seeking support from a solicitor only if it goes badly wrong.
most posters are not that interested in the vagaries of the law and the corrupt practices that no doubt go on because
most posters are only interested in getting them and theirs through this with the least possible hassle and the least possible damage.
all posters are just human doing the best they can under sometimes impossible circumstances while extending as much help to their fellow strugglers as they can.
and that's why AAD and Niddy are so special

[greymatter]

Re: Elephant in the room

Excellent MrsD
Covers it nicely
GM

[still looking]

Re: Elephant in the room

Excellent MrsD excellent and I will echo the same, Great site and great support from Niddy Paul and all the troops here.

[Pixie]

Re: Elephant in the room

Very well said MrsD

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Elephant in the room

Is this a GE money account? ie a store card which was transfered to credit card?

You really don't need to ask users for this, it's the first thing I pick up on mate when I check the agreements

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Elephant in the room

See above

(add)Sorry about the colours i give up. I am sure you will be able to decipher

I sorted the colour quotes for you. Lets wait for the automated version of our UE Checker, see how that looks before arguing nonsense points here that may never materialise.

Point here is, no need to change as we aint broken. Thus things will remain the same, in general.

A recent example of how our templates and current system does work --> allaboutFORUMS - View Single Post - SXGuy's UE Diary

[gravytrain]

Re: Elephant in the room

I sorted the colour quotes for you. Lets wait for the automated version of our UE Checker, see how that looks before arguing nonsense points here that may never materialise.

Point here is, no need to change as we aint broken. Thus things will remain the same, in general.

A recent example of how our templates and current system does work --> allaboutFORUMS - View Single Post - SXGuy's UE Diary

Hmm nonsense points ?

I think Paul illustrated examples where templates issued by posters with no knowledge of what they are doing backfired.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Elephant in the room

Hmm nonsense points ?

I think Paul illustrated examples where templates issued by posters with no knowledge of what they are doing backfired.

Nonsense points as in we can go round in circles for a week to then decide nah, lets use this instead. lol - sorry, it's my lingo

Maybe Paul did illustrate this, but me and Paul have varying views on certain things and whilst no situation fits all, we feel as a whole things work fine so we have no immediate plans to change what we do.

Don't see this as negativity, it's defending what we do. It appears you want to go the way of Paul's thinking which may well be best all round but sadly he cannot take each and every case on his books, hence we are here and we refer cases that we feel need intervention. To date of all the cases referred to him only a couple have had errors, such as letters sent/ignored. Usually we win our cases, it's those that come here too late that we struggle with.

Remember we've over 10 users here that will be SB later this year on several debts, those that were with me on MSE back in 2007. So we aint doing that bad are we....