liandconsmum's UE Diary

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Sometimes it just feels nice to push the bully back a little bit.

Totally agree - well done

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Just a bit of it. I kept it low key, but enjoyed a slight bit of sarcasm. They'll probably ignore it, but I don't care. LOL

Your letter dated 04 August 2011 stated that you needed notification within 14 days if it was still believed that there was a valid dispute. On 12 August 2011, you then sent a letter stating that you know of “no genuine reason” why this account is still outstanding and stated that you would be implementing the use of a door step collection agent. As it is unlikely that you do not have a calendar available for your utilisation, it shouldn't need to be pointed out to you that from 04 August 2011 to 12 August 2011 is hardly 14 days, even if you are not considerate enough to allow time for second class post to arrive (as the first letter was received on 10 August 2011). Furthermore, you are well aware that there is an ongoing dispute regarding this account, as you reference it in your letter of 04 August 2011. As you most likely have a file for this account in which this information is readily available to you, I can only attribute this manner of correspondence to blatant harassment, and as such it will be dealt with accordingly,

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

and.....

just like clockwork... letter from Tesco, refusing to send CCA until DH gives them his signature (letter says "to ensure that we are releasing the account information to the correct party we need to verify your identity") ... LOL Last time it took them 9 months to comply (still without a signature...)

Any bets on how long it will take this time?

ETA: I'm going to wait a few days before I respond with the "no signature needed" letter, as I suspect I'll get a similar response from our SAR request. LOL

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Alrighty. Here's what's up with our stuff.

Halifax - Iqor has sent the information to GPB solicitors (again). The most recent communications have been as follows:

October 2010
- After we pointed out to Moorcroft that the CCA response was not complete and therefore UE, they responded by saying they have been acting in good faith, but felt they needed to return to account to Halifax and cease any further activity with it.

November 2010
- letter from Iqor (dated 3rd) demanding balance in full immediately.
- letter sent to Iqor (dated 15th) stating UE (template)

December 2010
- letter from Iqor (dated 16th) demanding payment of balance in full immediately.
- statement from Halifax (dated 23rd) wanting payment

January 2011
- letter from GPB solicitors (dated 7th)

February 2011
- letter to GPB solicitors (dated 13th) stating account in dispute, is UE, with copy enclosed of recent letter to Iqor regarding UE. Insisted account be returned to Halifax.
- letter from Iqor (dated 22nd) re our letter to the solicitors stating that Halifax says there is no dispute that they are aware of and if so, we need to contact them and advise them of it. Said account would be placed on hold for 2 weeks to allow us time to respond (taking it to the 8th of March, without allowing for postage)

March 2011
- letter to Iqor (dated 08th) stating that Halifax is well aware of the problem and have not yet bothered to resolve it. Demanded account be returned to Halifax.
- letter from Wescot (dated 08th - so obviously the 2 wks was ignored) demanding payment immediately.
- letter from Wescot (dated 21st) demanding payment immediately. States "FINAL NOTICE" as well as "our latest enquiries have now confirmed that you are still resident at this address". (well of course we are, we've been communicating with everyone related to this debacle from this address!)

April 2011
- letter from NGP solicitors (dated 2nd) offering reduced settlement if we ring Wescot immediately within 10 days (recvd on 08th, so already 6 days in!)
- letter sent to Wescot (dated 04th) stating UE
- letter sent to NGP solicitors (dated 13th) pointing out it's in dispute and UE, and insisting account be returned to Halifax.
- letter from Wescot (dated 19th) with copies of "statements as requested" and stating "payment is now required." Enclosed was a printed T&C (a number of pages) that said "This is a copy of your Agreement for you to keep." Obviously a CURRENT T&C as it had our current address, which is not where we were living when the account was initially opened. Odd.

June 2011
- letter from NGP solicitors (dated 06th) demanding payment.
- letter from Wescot (dated 17th) stating they would be sending door step collection agents.
- letter sent to NGP solicitors (dated 20th)stating account is in dispute and UE, insisting account be returned to Halifax.
- letter sent to Wescot (dated 27th)stating please see enclosed copy, with copy of PREVIOUS letter to them re door step collections highlighted in bright pink marker.
- statement from Halifax (dated 24th)requesting payment

July 2011
- letter from Iqor (dated 8th) demanding payment
- letter sent to Iqor (dated 19th) stating "please note this account is still in dispute, as you were previously advised in March of 2011"

August 2011
- letter from GPB solicitors demanding payment.

Is it just me, or this getting every so slightly ridiculous?!?!

I am going to put together another letter - very short - basically saying "as you were previously advised on xxxx date, this account is in dispute and UE" and send it to both GPB solicitors and Iqor. Not to mention they are switching DCAs all over the place (in a few instances before the time limits set by one DCA are even up).

I'm not wasting ink on writing long long letters to them anymore. I strongly suspect they are not reading them anyway!

ETA: I am soooo incredibly tempted to send them a one-liner letter saying "please re-read previous letter. Information still applies." and have done with it. LOL

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Tesco

- Letter from Wescot stating "thank you for bringing this to our attention" and they will check into it. (Amusing as I've brought it to their attention before and they didn't care!)

- Nothing further from Tesco re the SAR, so will be sending the "you don't need no stinkin' signature" letter and wait for their predictable "yes we do" letter.

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

It's interesting the things you find when you look closely. Upon checking my DN for the Halifax account, I've found the following things:

- the amount asked for in March 2010 on the DN, is less than what was reported as arrears and owing in the January 2010 statement. Therefore, the amount that is asked for on the DN would not take us out of breach.

- the DN (dated 9th March 2010) specifically states that the amount must be paid before 30th March 2010. However, they then sent a letter dated 22 March 2010, stating "We have recently issued a Notice of Default as you are in breach of your agreement. You have failed to repay the requested amount by the date shown on the notice. As a result we have terminated your credit agreement." I would assume that this means they have terminated the agreement wrongfully, as the deadline of 30th March had not even been reached yet when they sent this letter.

[Deepie]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Keep that DN very safe

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

RE: Halifax still..
Upon looking at the CCA, they've sent a couple things. First, they sent a double sided sheet - one side "for your signature" that has details, signature of them and DH, but no prescribed terms. Second side has "conditions of use". The terms listed on them, however, differ from the additional pages sent along with it, printed up, as the interest rates are all different. And it's not a current copy of T&C, as it has our old address and old fees listed on it. So if they're implying they sent all of that initially when the card was received, I'm puzzled why it would have 2 different sets of rates on it. Also, seems like I saw something about the prescribed terms having to be on the same page as the signature? (could be wrong though)

Then, when we told them it was UE, they sent what I think they are claiming is a "current T&C" printout as it our current address on it, and current fees. (Although I note that buried in the form, it states regarding post to us that "we will treat them as arriving two days after we posted them." Useful info to have, I suppose, especially regarding the DN and the constant switching from DCA to DCA.

Niddy - I apologise for the posts. I didn't realise I had put that many on! I'll go sit on my hands now and read quietly.

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Okay, I think I've sorted a letter to the solicitors. I'm just tired of this round and round thing from Halifax, so I'm sending it to the solicitors and to Iqor (the DCA).

Having received your letter dated 22 August 2011, I find myself once again reminding you that this account is in dispute and has been for quite some time without any attempt to resolve it by Halifax. I am enclosing a copy of my previous letter to your firm, dated 13 February 2011, for your information.

As both Halifax and Iqor Recovery Services are well aware of this situation, I can find no legitimate reason why they would present this account to your firm. Therefore, I can only conclude this is an attempt at harassment. I am also enclosing a copy of a recent letter to Iqor, dated 19 July 2011, showing that they have clearly been advised that the problem is still unresolved.

I will also remind you that your firm may be liable if you knowingly act on a disputed debt. I expect this account to be returned to Halifax and to have no further contact from you.

Not horribly subtle, but not over the top either (which, believe me, I was tempted to do!).

I'm contemplating requesting an SAR from them, to see exactly what they have - as they've sent any CCA information piecemeal and I'm curious what specifically they have. Plus I want to browse what PPI was on the account, as I know it had it for quite some time, as well as charges.

[helmsman]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Okay, I think I've sorted a letter to the solicitors. I'm just tired of this round and round thing from Halifax, so I'm sending it to the solicitors and to Iqor (the DCA).



Not horribly subtle, but not over the top either (which, believe me, I was tempted to do!).

I'm contemplating requesting an SAR from them, to see exactly what they have - as they've sent any CCA information piecemeal and I'm curious what specifically they have. Plus I want to browse what PPI was on the account, as I know it had it for quite some time, as well as charges.

Hi,
I shall watch the reply you get from Iqor with with interest as they have taken over my Halifax acc, they are the third dca so far and although its annoying having to send acc sold whilst in dispute ect it does seem to work well.
Best of luck

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

It does seem messy, doesn't it, the whole selling of accounts. Honestly, I have not had ONE creditor actually ADVISE us when it was going to a DCA, much less being sold. And I've had a few actually (including Halifax) that ignored letters we sent asking basically who in the hell actually owned and was collecting on the debt at any given time. I have yet to even see a notice of assignment - not sure what such a creature looks like.

[oldyboy]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Hi L and C's mum.

I've been looking through your thread and some others as I too plan to go down the UE route, and was just about to start my diary when I read some of your posts and noticed some things that creditors and DCA's are trying on that contravene OFT guidelines (Para 2.6):
1 Using more than 1 DCA after the same account resulting in harrassment.
2 Not notifying you when passing an account from one agency to another.

This seems to have been the case on both counts with one of your creditors, and it might be worth a complaint to the OFT.

As for having no Notices of Assignment I'm not sure if they're needed if a DCA is just acting for a creditor, but I've tripped up a few by telling them no NoA, no comment and demanded they prove their entitlement first. It winds them up no end!

Sorry for the long post but IMO it's all extra ammo to fight back with!

Oldy

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

just like clockwork... letter from Tesco, refusing to send CCA until DH gives them his signature (letter says "to ensure that we are releasing the account information to the correct party we need to verify your identity") ... LOL Last time it took them 9 months to comply (still without a signature...)

Any bets on how long it will take this time?

ETA: I'm going to wait a few days before I respond with the "no signature needed" letter, as I suspect I'll get a similar response from our SAR request. LOL

Why not humour the numpties by seeming to give them a signature, albeit one not written by DH? Just download a suitable handwriting font such as JohnLennon - link and, in 36 point and blue ink, use that for his name to make it look like DH had used a fountain pen.

Should they "get creative" and apply that "signature" to any documents, it should be quite easy to prove such "signatures" to be forgeries and thereby proof of a criminal offence.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

RE: Halifax still..

when we told them it was UE, they sent what I think they are claiming is a "current T&C" printout as it our current address on it, and current fees. (Although I note that buried in the form, it states regarding post to us that "we will treat them as arriving two days after we posted them." Useful info to have, I suppose, especially regarding the DN and the constant switching from DCA to DCA.

This is merely the "posting rule" - link - devised over a century ago when mail was never misdelivered and when full mail bags could not be seen floating down a river on hot summer days.

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Clever clogs - I actually thought of signing it myself, as my handwriting is sooo completely different from DH's. But I'd rather go about it straight forward at the moment, as if it goes into court, I don't want to look like I was trying to deceive them or be difficult. Silly, I know, but there it is.