mr affable's UE diary

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

As above ^^^^^

[mr affable]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Reply received from Capital One.

Copy sent to Niddy by email for his thoughts

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Reply received from Capital One.

Copy sent to Niddy by email for his thoughts

You can ignore this - it's their standard template, nothing to worry about - seen it 100 times before

[mr affable]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Great - thanks Niddy.

So presumably I just do nothing further and wait for it to become statute barred?

[mr affable]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Same reply received again from Mint to my letter telling them they do not need my signature to supply me with copy of CCA agreement. They have just returned my letters with my postal order and their tick box reply saying they require my signature before they can proceed.

What should I do now?

[mr affable]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Reply received from Waitrose to my CCA request. emailed copy to Niddy for his comments.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Same reply received again from Mint to my letter telling them they do not need my signature to supply me with copy of CCA agreement. They have just returned my letters with my postal order and their tick box reply saying they require my signature before they can proceed.

What should I do now?

Thank them.

[mr affable]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Niddy says from Waitrose reply that it is unenforceable and to send unenforceable letter

[mr affable]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Can I ask what may be a silly question?

Its to do with my Credit Rating (as checked on Experian Website). I was just curious as assumed it was shot to pieces in view of my being in default etc. However when I recently enquired about paying my car insurance by monthly instalments my insurer said they would just do a quick credit check which I assumed I would not pass but they said it was all ok!

Having then checked my credit rating with Experian it came back as good! Now I have no intention of borrowing any more money but I assume that even things like mobile phone contracts involve some sort of credit check.

So my question is this - if I stop paying my nominal monthly £1 payments to those creditors who are unenforceable will this be reflected badly in my credit rating? eg can they default me again or say that I am no longer keeping up my agreed repayment (even though it was only £1). Or will it not make much/any difference? And does the need to stop paying and thereby move towards statute barred outweigh any disadvantage?

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Have you thanked the Mint morons for having chosen to make their alleged agreement unenforceable by refusing to comply with your request for documents under s.78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974?

[ScabHunter]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Can I ask what may be a silly question?

Its to do with my Credit Rating (as checked on Experian Website). I was just curious as assumed it was shot to pieces in view of my being in default etc. However when I recently enquired about paying my car insurance by monthly instalments my insurer said they would just do a quick credit check which I assumed I would not pass but they said it was all ok!

Having then checked my credit rating with Experian it came back as good! Now I have no intention of borrowing any more money but I assume that even things like mobile phone contracts involve some sort of credit check.

That is strange to say the least. If you've been defaulted on these accounts and are just paying £1 as tokens your file should be shot to hell.

When did the defaults happen? The only thing I can think of is that for vehicle insurance they've only gone back three years or so instead of the usual six. Just speculating as I've no idea. I've never owned a vehicle so never needed insurance for one, and don't know how the system works.

Cell phone contracts do need credit checks, but not all credit checks are the same. Even when borrowing money lenders have different criteria they look at. Just because you've been declined in one place doesn't mean you'll be declined in another.

So my question is this - if I stop paying my nominal monthly £1 payments to those creditors who are unenforceable

Now I'm confused. It sounded from your earlier posts as though you already had stopped paying, except for the one which turned out to be enforceable. Haven't you stopped paying?

if I stop paying my nominal monthly £1 payments to those creditors who are unenforceable will this be reflected badly in my credit rating? eg can they default me again or say that I am no longer keeping up my agreed repayment (even though it was only £1)

In theory they cannot default you again. One default per account and it stays on the file for six years. Of course, what should happen and what does happen are not always the same thing.

And does the need to stop paying and thereby move towards statute barred outweigh any disadvantage?

Emphatically yes. If you keep making token payments, you will never be free of the situation in which you find yourself. Imagine if, in ten years time, you were suddenly to come into some good fortune. If you had been making token £1 payments, any one of these alleged creditors could decide to take their chance in court to get their hands on some of your new wealth. If you had paid £1 less, they would be screwed as all of the alleged debts would be statute barred.

I think the advice not to rock the boat on the one which has come back enforceable is sound. As for the rest, stop paying and start the limitation clock. You are entitled to withhold payments until they comply with your legitimate requests under s78 of the CCA 1974. If, at any time, they come up with a compliant CCA you can always consider resuming payments.

As for MINT, they are cretins. Your request remains legitimate, and if they want to play silly games instead of complying with it, the account will just remain unenforceable until it goes SB. Their problem, not yours.

SH

[mr affable]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Thanks for that.

Yes I will be stopping payments for everyone except for the Halifax which is enforceable.

[mr affable]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

As my Halifax credit card is enforceable I wrote to say that I could only afford to carry on paying nominal paymets of a £1 but i might be able to offer a small lump sum which a family member could make available if they accepted in full and final settlement.

However have now received reply in which they make no comment on that offer but say they are happy to carry on accepting £1 payments.

What more do these people want? They cant get blood out of a stone - i am trying to do the right thing but makes me wonder why I bother and should just go on paying £1 indefinitely?

Does anyone have similar experiences?

[Pip]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

As my Halifax credit card is enforceable I wrote to say that I could only afford to carry on paying nominal paymets of a £1 but i might be able to offer a small lump sum which a family member could make available if they accepted in full and final settlement.

However have now received reply in which they make no comment on that offer but say they are happy to carry on accepting £1 payments.

What more do these people want? They cant get blood out of a stone - i am trying to do the right thing but makes me wonder why I bother and should just go on paying £1 indefinitely?

Does anyone have similar experiences?

Hello mister!

Others more experienced and knowledgeable than myself will hopefully be able to comment further (and hopefully correct me where applicable!) but this is how I see it:

I get the feeling that even for pre-2007 CCAs, the original creditors or DCAs (or more specifically the staff doing the day-to-day donkey work in these operations) don't actually know one way or another whether the CCAs they send in response to requests are actually enforceable or unenforceable. So when Niddy says a CCA is or , it's not as if the OC or DCA necessarily already knows this for definite as well.

Another assumption I make is that bargain basement F&F offers are not made or accepted by original creditors or in-house DCAs. By writing to them offering the £1 a month, it seems like you'll have reset the SB clock. I wonder whether it would have been worth waiting and stringing it out as long as possible until they flog it off to a DCA where a very low F&F negotiation might have been possible down the road?

All my accounts are pre-2007, but some are . What I'm hoping to do is to string out the letter ping-pong for as long as possible (hopefully beyond 6 years until statute barred?) until things get heavy with genuine threats of court action, most likely from a DCA that has bought the debt. At that point, I'll follow specific advice from the forum, hopefully with a view to (i) convincing/demonstrating to the DCA that if they take me to court, the most they can hope for is £1 a month anyway, and then maybe (ii) explaining to them that a friend/relative is offering to lend me money to get shot of this particular debt, but they are only going to lend me it if I can prove to them that it's been knocked down to 10-20% (say). If the DCA says "no", then it'll be back to the £1 a month. Or maybe 50p a month.

If any of this does come to pass (i.e. genuine threats and obvious manoeuvrings towards actual court action), I'll be asking for specific advice from the very good folk here! There is a certain amount of speculation and assumption here though on my part so if anyone has any extra light to shed, I'd also be grateful!

Pip
:

[mr affable]

Re: mr affable's UE diary

Thanks for that Pip (I thought everyone had forgotten me lol!).

I take your point about it being more likely that a DCA would accept a lower F & F and the only quick way to get it there is to stop paying altogether. I guess as I have no assets they are unlikely to make me bankrupt but they could go for an attachment to earnings?

Whats happened with yours - I presume you have stopped paying anything?