Greymatter's ue Diary

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Hi Niddy
I just noticed that the tab :"The following users say thank you Greymatter for this useful post" is missing under my post insertions,or am I missing something here?
Thanks Niddy
GM

[Deepie]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Hi Niddy
I just noticed that the tab :"The following users say thank you Greymatter for this useful post" is missing under my post insertions,or am I missing something here?
Thanks Niddy
GM

That's because nobody has thanked it....

Is it there now...?

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Ooh that makes me look a right twit,but there is nowt there only a triangle black with a white exclamation mark.
Thanks Deepie
GM

[Deepie]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Ooh that makes me look a right twit,but there is nowt there only a triangle black with a white exclamation mark.
Thanks Deepie
GM

What do you see on post 751 ?

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Yep your right
Its OK
Pillock me was looking for the thank you symbol on my own post.
Sorry Deepie
I must of had a very senior moment,oops,and thanks for your help Deepie.
GM

[Deepie]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Yep your right
Its OK
Pillock me was looking for the thank you symbol on my own post.
Sorry Deepie
I must of had a very senior moment,oops,and thanks for your help Deepie.
GM

No worries ..........

[IF]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Happens to us all GM

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

4/03/14
Hi Niddy
UPDATE
Letter from Wilkin Chapman making several points which I will paraphrase for ease:
1) As far as their client is concerned I have not made a valid request(CCA sec 77)--I have and it was made 3/11/2011 and recorded and signed for.It was made at the time to Moorcroft.
2) Notwithstanding the above their client has already disclosed to me a true copy of the original loan agreement and statement showing amount due----this figure actually is wrong
3)They are basically knocking my response in raising technical points and go on to say that on the face of it it I have not disputed the fact that I entered into an agreement or received the loan.They say my argument is not sufficient for me to maintain that this claim is a lost cause.

They went on to say my legal argument in their view is wrong.That I am trying to avoid paying.
They now suggest that within 7 days I need to give them a realistic proposal for settling the outstanding amount,or their client will consider issuing court proceedings etc.
Their concluding point is :"It is neither party's interest to engage in such proceedings ....but they reserve the right to produce their letter to the court on the question of legal costs as evidence that I have so far(1) failed to make a valid and proper request ...sec 77 CCA and (2) failed to set out my grounds for disputing the debt"

Well Niddy thats about it.I have got copies of the original CCA request and original signed receipt of the recorded delivery.
Please would you give me some guidance as to what response I should issue.
Many thanks
Greymatter

UPDATE 17/04/2014
Hi Niddy
I have received another letter from Wilkin Chapman,basically they repeated what they said last time regarding not made a valid request re:Sec 77 and furthermore they say that I have not disputed the Loan agreement that they say I have had a true copy and entered into and signed.
If I do not reply with a suitable agreement etc etc they will take out clients instructions on commencing court proceedings.

My previous response was 'enough is enough' plus I pointed out that I had actually made a valid and proper request re sec 77.

Please could you guide me as to the appropriate response Niddy.

Just as a reminder I sent the docs to you some time ago and you deemed them UE.
This is an old Egg account that had PPI.
Many thanks
GM

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Hi Deepie
What do you think I should respond with,or do I ignore?
I assume Niddy is up to his eyes in work,its just a habit from old addressing my initial requests to Niddy in the first instance.
I respect and welcome your help and advice as always.
Thanks
GM

[Deepie]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

UPDATE 17/04/2014


My previous response was 'enough is enough' plus I pointed out that I had actually made a valid and proper request re sec 77.

If it were me ....... I'd just see what they do next you've sent the enough is enough letter........

or you could send this

• -------> Final Response - UE (General)

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Thanks Deepie
I think that I will wait and see what they send next,as they completely ignored my previous letter which in fact informs them that I did comply with the legality of requesting and paying for CCA sec 77.
Naturally I have proof positive of all of this.
So,I will sit tight and wait for their response.I will keep you fully updated as usual.
Have a good Easter.
GM

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Hi Deepie
Just a quick point regarding my decision to sit tight.As they are threatening possible action is it wise for me to sit this out.I remember Paul banging on about 'don't ignore legal action threats' or am I getting a tad paranoid here?
May I have your views please.
GM

[Deepie]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Hi Deepie
Just a quick point regarding my decision to sit tight.As they are threatening possible action is it wise for me to sit this out.I remember Paul banging on about 'don't ignore legal action threats' or am I getting a tad paranoid here?
May I have your views please.
GM

Up to you ..I'm just going on my past experience .....some letters need a response some don't...

Most of mine will be SB in October this year ....That's the name of the game ....

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Thanks Deepie
Just my lack of experience showing through.
Much appreciated
GM

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Originally Posted by greymatter
4/03/14
Hi Niddy
UPDATE
Letter from Wilkin Chapman making several points which I will paraphrase for ease:
1) As far as their client is concerned I have not made a valid request(CCA sec 77)--I have and it was made 3/11/2011 and recorded and signed for.It was made at the time to Moorcroft.
2) Notwithstanding the above their client has already disclosed to me a true copy of the original loan agreement and statement showing amount due----this figure actually is wrong
3)They are basically knocking my response in raising technical points and go on to say that on the face of it it I have not disputed the fact that I entered into an agreement or received theloan.They say my argument is not sufficient for me to maintain that this claim is a lost cause.

They went on to say my legal argument in their view is wrong.That I am trying to avoid paying.
They now suggest that within 7 days I need to give them a realistic proposal for settling the outstanding amount,or their client will consider issuing court proceedings etc.
Their concluding point is :"It is neither party's interest to engage in such proceedings ....but they reserve the right to produce their letter to the court on the question of legal costs as evidence that I have so far(1) failed to make a valid and proper request ...sec 77 CCA and (2) failed to set out my grounds for disputing the debt"

Well Niddy thats about it.I have got copies of the original CCA request and original signed receipt of the recorded delivery.
Please would you give me some guidance as to what response I should issue.
Many thanks
04/03/14 Deepie:response: Send template:'Enough is enough'
04/03/14 " Sent Rec Del ''


UPDATE
06/05/14
Hi Deepie
The account has been sold to Arc Global by Britannica.
They have handed the account to:Clarity Credit Management.
Arc Europe was handling the account via Britannica in 2012.So it looks like Arc have completed the circle.
So I will wait until I get the usual spate of 'phone calls and respond with a 'Sold in whilst in dispute' letter.
Do you agree?
Many thanks
GM