Halifax UE

[apples]

Re: Halifax UE

Something I should have picked up before, the account was a 'Credit Card' account, but Capquest can't tell the difference, they've got it as a 'Bank' account. I don't know if it's related but the Co-op have put up the interest rate on my Credit Card with them.

[apples]

Re: Halifax UE

Hi guys

Halifax gave me a date to bring the account up to date, 9th Oct 2010, but then sent me a letter on the 1st Oct 2010 telling me that because I hadn't bought the account up to date they have terminated my credit agreement.

I've written to Capquest lets see what they say, got a letter today saying they are getting the requested information. Good luck with that.

By the way Thanks guys.

Donald Rumsfeld was right when he said,

'There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know.
There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know.
But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don't know.'

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Halifax UE

Excellent. Rubbish DN's make a nice backup

sometimes....


They might remedy the breach (if they haven't terminated)!

But in this case it's very useful

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Halifax UE

Just out of interest, have you kept the default notices? Both mine from Halifax were rubbish..

i thought we'd sorted your HBOS fiasco out?

[Undercover Elsa]

Re: Halifax UE

Excellent. Rubbish DN's make a nice backup

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Halifax UE

Well now it's time to play hard ball & ignore them. If they get stroppy give us a shout & we'll help put them back in their box for you

[apples]

Re: Halifax UE

Hi Elsa

I've got the Default Notices, they are defective, I've kept all the communications.

[Undercover Elsa]

Re: Halifax UE

I'd just hang fire till you get the CEO response, Apple. Let us know what they say. Don't be too quick to respond, you'll not get any sense out of them.
Time to spin things out and keep a low profile until your SB date methinks.

Just out of interest, have you kept the default notices? Both mine from Halifax were rubbish..

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Halifax UE

Also mixed messages in all that regards whether this has actually been sold or not? CRA entry not changed, and reference to "client"?

It doesn't need any CRA alteration if the OC has only assigned the collection rights. It could simply be partially assigned hence the CRA entry could/would remain as the bank as would full assignment.

Thus it would not class as a disputable reason either.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Halifax UE

Hi Never-In-Doubt

I just want to be 'treated fairly' just like any other consumer. The OFT list is a non-exhaustive list. The account was opened with Bank One, which I have proof of. As far as Halifax are concerned the account was opened with Halifax. When I tried to claim back credit card charges pre 2004, Halifax stated the account was opened with Halifax. PPI had been added to the account, but I had it refunded a long time ago. I stopped paying in 2010.

Hi

i never mentioned the OFT list. I'm basing this on my experience of court / FOS / here. You do not have a disputable argument here. Just because you say it's in dispute doesn't necessarily mean that it is. I get that it was opened with Bank One - ie HBOS. Bank One is Halifax, as they absorbed Bank One. That is correct.

Aaah so you must be one of CAG/Ganders poor victims that thought it was wise to sue the lender

Ok, whether you lost in court or not doesn't stop you applying for a ppi refund the PROPER way; if not already done. But if you had it paid back a long time ago, why'd you take them to court?

Can you clarify exactly what you want to achieve? Being treated fairly is something sadly, nobody here can assist with. However we can help you fight back but I'm still unsure what your argument/ideals are?

Try not to let it get to you. It's as easy to tell them to get lost you know!

[apples]

Re: Halifax UE

Hi Riz

Sums it up nicely, they should not be misrepresenting their position. I should get letters from the buyer and seller.

Also mixed messages in all that regards whether this has actually been sold or not? CRA entry not changed, and reference to "client"?

NOA should come from the buyer, not the seller for an account of that age. Daft, but last time I checked that was the implication of the LOPA as it stands/stood when CCD modifications don't apply.

[apples]

Re: Halifax UE

Hi Never-In-Doubt

I just want to be 'treated fairly' just like any other consumer. The OFT list is a non-exhaustive list. The account was opened with Bank One, which I have proof of. As far as Halifax are concerned the account was opened with Halifax. When I tried to claim back credit card charges pre 2004, Halifax stated the account was opened with Halifax. PPI had been added to the account, but I had it refunded a long time ago. I stopped paying in 2010.

Sorry to ask the obvious but what is the "serious dispute" - nothing you've said is defined as a valid consumer dispute.

What is the score? What are you trying to achieve? Why did you end up in court - over what? Was ppi sold with the card? When did you stop paying....

[Riz]

Re: Halifax UE

Why did you end up in court - over what?

Nids. I read that from the OP that is was a failed charges reclaim through the courts? Presumably back in the mists of time when that was thought to be a good idea?

[Riz]

Re: Halifax UE

Also mixed messages in all that regards whether this has actually been sold or not? CRA entry not changed, and reference to "client"?

NOA should come from the buyer, not the seller for an account of that age. Daft, but last time I checked that was the implication of the LOPA as it stands/stood when CCD modifications don't apply.

[Riz]

Re: Halifax UE

OFT Guidelines definition on what they consider is a valid dispute.

Annex A DISPUTED AND DEADLOCKED DEBT

Disputed debt

A.1 Where we refer to 'reasonably queried or disputed debt' we mean justifiably queried or disputed. We are not seeking to protect 'won't pays' from repaying debts duly owed but those who are being mistakenly pursued for a debt they do not owe (or genuinely believe they do not owe) or those who are being pursued for an incorrect amount of unpaid debt.

A.2 We may require businesses to satisfy us that any query/dispute has been properly investigated.

A.3 A non-exhaustive list of examples of what the OFT would consider valid grounds for disputing a debt include:
• the individual being pursued for the debt is not the actual debtor (or the guarantor of the debt) or
• the debt does not exist or
• the amount of the debt being pursued is incorrect.

Plus: http://www.oft.gov.uk/about-the-oft/...dit-agreements

If this information is not provided within 12 working days the debt becomes unenforceable. This means a creditor:

• cannot:
  - make the debtor pay the debt before they're supposed to
  - get a court judgment against the debtor
  - take back anything hired or bought on credit, or take anything used as security in the agreement.
• can:
  - ask debtors to pay what they owe
  - send a default notice
  - pass information on to a credit reference agency
  - pass information on to a debt collector
  - sell the debt to someone else
  - take the case to court.

Regardless, I'm not aware of anything in guidance or legislation that prohibits the sale of a disputed debt. The closest I seem to recall is some comment somewhere or other that if a disputed debt is sold then they (the OFT) expect sufficient details of the dispute to be passed on to the buyer with the sale.