NRAM

[lloydjones]

I have a Northern Rock loan account that I haven't paid into since December 2009 after I was told by Eastleys Solicitors in Paignton that the loan agreement was UE. However, I have since been informed by Niddy that the debt is in fact enforceable! The account has been passed to various DCAs but I have not replied to any letter received from any of the DCAs and acknowledged the debt. The most recent DCA was Allied or AIC who made a settlement offer of approx. £9000 for my £23000 debt. I have received a letter from Northern Rock (NRAM) this week stating they have recalled the debt from Allied and that their Internal Loss Recovery Unit are dealing with the outstanding debt. They have stated that if they fail to contact me they will:

(i) instruct a differnt DCA
(ii) take legal action to have payments towards the debt deducted from my salary
(iii) a CCJ against me and a 'Charge' against my assets
(iv) petition for bankruptcy
(v) consider other legal action to recover the debt
(vi) sell my debt to a debt purchaser

Does anyone else have experience of this from NRAM. What do you think their most likely course of action will be? I am holding out from statute barred in December 2014. Will I make it???

All advice/help gratefully received. Thanks.

[PriorityOne]

Re: NRAM

If this will be stat barred next year, I would do my level best to string it out until that time....

The content of their letter is pretty standard blurb and at this stage, it's probably best to wait and see what they send next. If they farmed this out years ago, then there must have been reason for it, so while the paperwork might well be UE, they might have a job substantiating the current alleged balance outstanding on their books as of now.

Another thing to consider is that while they might have had paperwork way back in 2009, they might not have it now..... so I'd also be sending off a fresh CCA request but not just yet. ;-)

**EDIT**... Blame the tiredness.... I read this as being enforceable, which did seem odd as it's been farmed out to all and sundry. Personally, I wouldn't worry about it for now and the rest of my post stands. When they write again and possibly get sh*tty, send off a CCA request and chances are they'll have nothing enforceable, as before. :-)

[Still Waving]

Re: NRAM

Hi LJ

Were you residing in Scotland when the loan was taken out? If not, by my reckoning you have an extra year and a bit to get to statute barred - ie beyond Dec 2014.

[Paul.]

Re: NRAM

Can you perhaps explain on what basis Eastleys said the agreement was not compliant and therefore improperly executed?

Often people look for the prescribed terms being there, but that is not enough for compliance, as the House of Lords made clear, the prescribed terms must not only be there BUT must be accurate, they cannot in the slightest be misstated, even so much as £0.01p out is enough to kill an agreement.


So, if you can advise what the keys reasons were, i may well be able to assist further.

Also if your playing the Limitation card make sure your contract isnt worded the same as BMW v Harts was, as the limitation point may cause you a headache.

[lloydjones]

Re: NRAM

Hi LJ

Were you residing in Scotland when the loan was taken out? If not, by my reckoning you have an extra year and a bit to get to statute barred - ie beyond Dec 2014.

My mistake, not paid into it since November 2008, first missed payment was December 2008.

[lloydjones]

Re: NRAM

Can you perhaps explain on what basis Eastleys said the agreement was not compliant and therefore improperly executed?

Often people look for the prescribed terms being there, but that is not enough for compliance, as the House of Lords made clear, the prescribed terms must not only be there BUT must be accurate, they cannot in the slightest be misstated, even so much as £0.01p out is enough to kill an agreement.


So, if you can advise what the keys reasons were, i may well be able to assist further.

Also if your playing the Limitation card make sure your contract isnt worded the same as BMW v Harts was, as the limitation point may cause you a headache.

Hi. Unfortunately I have no idea what reasons Eastleys claimed the agreement was unenforceable sorry? Do you think I should send a CCA request again?

[Paul.]

Re: NRAM

Hi. Unfortunately I have no idea what reasons Eastleys claimed the agreement was unenforceable sorry? Do you think I should send a CCA request again?

Eastleys were your solicitors? and you dont know the basis of unenforceability?

Thats outrageous, i always advise my clients on the basis of their case, and what, if anything, is wrong with their documents etc.

[PriorityOne]

Re: NRAM

Hi. Unfortunately I have no idea what reasons Eastleys claimed the agreement was unenforceable sorry? Do you think I should send a CCA request again?

I've since edited my last post, as I read it as being enforceable, sorry. You will need to send a CCA request off at some stage but it's up to you whether you want to do it now or string them along for another few weeks. If it was enforceable, then chances are they would have done something about it before now....

[lloydjones]

Re: NRAM

Eastleys were your solicitors? and you dont know the basis of unenforceability?

Thats outrageous, i always advise my clients on the basis of their case, and what, if anything, is wrong with their documents etc.

I was taken for a right royal ride by Eastleys! A little too naive to say the least at that point. That's all I had was a letter stating it was UE but with no explanation? Shall I send for the CCA again?

[Paul.]

Re: NRAM

I was taken for a right royal ride by Eastleys! A little too naive to say the least at that point. That's all I had was a letter stating it was UE but with no explanation? Shall I send for the CCA again?

If youve made a section 77 request and it has not been complied with in accordance with the 1974 Act then there is no need to make a second request, the unenforceability flows from the first breach.

If you are able to do so, can you post a redacted copy of what they sent you.

I had a case where the CAB said an agreement was enforceable, where lawyers said it was enforceable, and i disagreed, i challenged the agreement in court and the judgment is in our case law area, the case was Phoenix v Dr Ian Cresswell.

Point being, as i often say, opinions are like arseholes, everyones got one, but not all of them are right. a second opinion cant do any harm, i have been known to find the faults in agreements that sometimes get overlooked.

[lloydjones]

Re: NRAM

If youve made a section 77 request and it has not been complied with in accordance with the 1974 Act then there is no need to make a second request, the unenforceability flows from the first breach.

If you are able to do so, can you post a redacted copy of what they sent you.

I had a case where the CAB said an agreement was enforceable, where lawyers said it was enforceable, and i disagreed, i challenged the agreement in court and the judgment is in our case law area, the case was Phoenix v Dr Ian Cresswell.

Point being, as i often say, opinions are like arseholes, everyones got one, but not all of them are right. a second opinion cant do any harm, i have been known to find the faults in agreements that sometimes get overlooked.

Leave it with me!

[lloydjones]

Re: NRAM

[Paul.]

Re: NRAM

Is that it?

Is that all you were supplied?

[lloydjones]

Re: NRAM

Yes, that is it!

[Paul.]

Re: NRAM

Yes, that is it!

so in reply to a s77 request they just sent you that document? that one page?

If so, then that is a technical breach of the Consumer Credit Act and Niddy is unfortunatley incorrect as the agreement would be rendered unenforceable, but the unenforceability would be a redeemable breach only and could be put right.

There would i assume have been terms and conditions that accompanied the loan, they would need to be provided, and also s77 requires the copy to be sent "Together with" ie at the same time, a statement showing the state of the account as set out in 77(1).