Thanks again

Thanks to both of you If we had realised in advance what a royal PITA claiming CT relief was, we most likely would have not bothered and just struggled. Cynic in me wonders if that is the Council's intent... Thankfully it's only 3 months in question, we could pay it if forced to, although I'm guessing that withdrawing the claim now would be seen as suspicious anyway

Short question first, we were both unemployed but the council want to know why, when we made a claim for council tax support, we did not make a joint claim for JSA-income based. I see no requirement to be "actively seeking work" to claim CT support, but am happy to be corrected if in fact there is one. I am aware that being unemployed without claiming reduces the reduction they will pay for me, basically just looking at claiming what we were entitled to claim as a couple for the period my wife was unemployed. Background: I have not worked for some time and have not claimed JSA. My wife was made redundant last October and made a claim for JSA and Council Tax support for the period from October until she started a new job in January. (3 and a bit months). The original claim was a joint claim for JSA- income based but due to misunderstandings it was not explained that I would have to 'sgin on' and prove I was looking for work. Which I wasn't (for reasons) so I refused and it went ahead as a single claim for contribution based JSA. Fair enough, but now I have to explain to the council why I did not claim JSA. What is the best way to phrase " I was not actively seeking work so refused to sign on"?

I'd forgotten about this thread - to update we are now shot of them and have a standard "high street" mortgage with Abbey... Fortunately we used a solicitor who was aware of their reputation when we switched and things were quite straightforward. They did try to charge us a month more interest than they should have done, although they paid this back promptly when politely asked to On the original point, Preferred were quite good really, they changed the payments when it was bought to their attention and didn't backdate the interest.

We have a mortgage with Preferred (now Capstone) which was fixed until June 08. (@5.99%) However they have not revised the rate or the payments since the fixed rate should have finished, (our current rate should be Libor+1.8%) so now we are effectively not paying enough. Ok you may think that's "good" but I am deeply suspicious of a possible [problem] involving "arrears" that they have artificially created. We have informed Capstone on three separate occasions that the payments are incorrect but they have done nothing - what should be the next step? However tempting , ignoring this is not an option because I don't want to face a large bill down the line... Thanks.

Thank you I have pasted that into Word and shall print it and send it off tomorrow Wolf

I did post about this back in January, but I can't seem to make any headway with AK and can't see what approach to take next. Basically company A registered a default against an account in 2002 (I'm not actually disputing this default). Then in late 2003 a payment for the full amount outstanding was subsequently sent to the DCA dealing with the account at the time, who was NCO. NCO have flatly refused to acknowledge receiving payment, despite proof having been obtained from the bank which issued the cheque used. In 2005, AK took over this account and updated the CRA entry to show their name against the account (and the default). As I can't seem to get anywhere actually proving payment was received, I can't get AK to mark the account as satisfied. The amount they claim is "outstanding" is small and I could easily pay it again but why should I? And would it make any difference anyway? Am I right in thinking that the default will "fall off" next year anyway, despite being updated by AK? Wolf

Thanks for replying, unfortunatlely I have tried that, NCO was sent more than one letter stating this, as was AK. See above See above NCO refuse to deal with the issue now, saying that the "account" has been "passed on" and is now "nothing to do with us". Clearly it is, but how can I get them to deal with it? AK claimed to have "investigated" the matter with NCO and say that as far as they (AK) are concerned, the amount is still outstanding. I realise that it's only £250 and I'm not worried if AK do take legal action as they are bound to lose, but obviously it's not helping my credit rating Wolf

Hi all, this is my first post here Basically my question is, "What constitutes proof of payment?", as Aktive Kapital are rejecting everything I send them that shows I have actually paid in full a debt they are chasing And my other question, is "What do I do now?" Background: I am being hassled by Aktiv Kapital for a small debt (£250) that was settled by cheque 3 years ago. The complication is that the cheque was issued by a third party, a solicitor, and was paid to the DCA acting at the time; which was NCO. NCO dispute having ever received or cashing the cheque, the solicitor and their bank disagree and a photocopy of the the cashed cheque was obtained from the issuing bank and sent to NCO who still denied receiving it. The debt appears to have then been passed to Aktiv Kapital who have also been given all the details, photocopies, letters from CAB etc.. The solicitor refuses to provide a copy of the relevant bank statement, claiming confidentiality and "legal" reasons, although the have agreed to show such to a judge, should this go to court. What's the next step? Wolf