This is a scenario i heard about a while ago and I have been discussing this with some friends. A couple have a loan that they have not been able to make the payments on. They made arrangements with the company to make token payments. This was in 2004. A default was never issued against this account and payment are still being made in 2010. On checking their credit file, this account is still marked as open and the payments are all being marked as late payments. I would argue that as the agreement was breached by the customer, the account should be marked as closed as of that date. Others are arguing that because no default was ever issued, that the account will remain open and 6 years after the last payment is made on the debt, this is when the account will fall off their credit file. Can anyone shed some light on this? I couldn't find any guidance to help clarify the options available to the couple. It seems very harsh for them to be punished with that 'bad' account on their credit file for so long. What would others advise?

I was wondering if anyone knew of a table showing which banks are associated with others with regards to the right to offset. I saw this on the financial ombudsman site, but would liek some clarification. Is the 'Firm' in question here the named company on the account or could this be an organisation that has a number of banks. I know this is a poor example as they are registered companies and may be treated differently, but as a general example: You have an account with Halifax in arrears and savings in a Lloyds account. Could Halifax as part of the Lloyds group offest from the Lloyds account? Was unsure if Natwest and Co-op were under a group in the same manner and if anyone knew where i could find a list of associated institutions. I've seen them for credit card providers but wasn't sure if there is some difference between a registered company and a subsidiary (not sure what was going on with Santander taking over so many banks and building societies) Edit: I recall there was a list of associated banks i had seen before, but this was for the government's 50k guarantee (increased from 25k). I don't think these work in the same way. Many thanks George

I know i shouldn't crosspost, but getting really concerned about this. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/259461-ccas-transferred-debts.html In short, someone was considering bankruptcy. They were advised that they may be able to go down the unenforcability route. Some of the debt is on accounts opened after 6th April 2007 and an overdraft. This is where it gets messy. They have been advised that they may be able to transfer this debt to an older credit card then after a few months, check the enforcability of that card. I believe the Fraud Act 2006 would cover this (section 11). The person advising them is adamant however that there is nothing to worry about as it is too small an amount for them to go to court over and that the payment towards the debt for 3 or 4 months (taking money from that card to pay towards its own minimum payments) would negate any argument of dihonesty. Trying to illustrate that they were robbing Peter to pay Paul but that they have now been unable to maintain payments and are checking if the orignal agreement was properly executed. Apart from the moral side of this (the person was considering bankruptcy so the banks would not have got thier money back), can i have people's opinion of the arguments for and against this? I was intending to check the enforcability of the older accounts then see if the person could go on a DRO. Not sure if unenforcable debts would count towards the total debt though. I think the route they have been advised is just too risky to contemplate though. thanks George

A friend of mine was considering bankruptcy but wanted to ask me about the possibility of using the CCA unenforcability argument. A fair chunk of their debt is on newer cards so o said this would probably not work, but they asked if they could transfer the funds from the newer cards to old accounts that they have and then CCA these old accounts. I'm not too sure about this - they would probably keep making payments for a while before lookng into the enforcability of the accounts but i was wondering: Can you actually do this? Would it be considered deception or fraud? If they were to do this and requested a SAR (to check the agreement) before doing the transfers, would this count against them? Thoughts and advice appreciated.

Not sure if there is a guide on here for filling in a N244 form. Any ideas guys? You say you've emigrated to Canada. Does this mean that you wouldn't be able to attend any hearing? I find it a little surprising that there were no credit agreements issued to you when you did the SAR's. It may be a case of mistaken identity, but if so, this is a helluva balls up.

Ah, so a photo may have been used to show that a parking ticket was issued or to show the offence if he had never actually received a ticket. Wasn't sure what photos were used for with regards parking offences. I'll tell him to pay it before it doubles and that he should get out of bed quicker in the mornings. Amny thanks Green & Mean

Issued by a Parking Attendant (Edinburgh Council) He says he can't remember if it was placed on the car or if she handed it to him. Photos are available to view from the council website - you input the PCN number and can see the photo associated with the ticket. I checked and he said the violation was "Parking in a restricted street during the restricted hours". There is no ticket on the car in the photo, but i don't know if that matters nowadays.

A colleague of mine was wondering if it is possible to appeal a parking ticket he got in Edinburgh (Scotland). The picture of the car doesn't have the ticket on it. I had heard that there was a change to the rules in April 2008, but don't know what they were and whether he can contest the ticket or not. As it is Edinburgh, it would be a civil rather than criminal matter i believe. Can anyone advise?

I did wonder about the phrase Could this be misconstrued as 'blacklisting' ?? From the way that letter reads, i don't think that can be misconstrued at all. They are pooling your 'account conduct' information with other parties and by the way this is worded, it is not just entries of missed payments on your credit file. I would like to see what legislation allows them to do this and how any future creditor would access the information - and what that information is.

Really sorry to hear this EOTR. Had hoped you would be able to get a good result from this. Have you contacted Watchdog or any programs to highlight the obvious shortcomings of FOS and the bank? With the number of reposessions increasing it is definately a hot topic. Hope you and hubby come out of this alright. George

First and last bump. Just wondering if this person should be taking court action and if anyone can advise what they should be doing. thanks.

DCA = debt collection agency. As long as it's partially on the same subject, knock yourself out.

So should L&G have paid interest for making them wait 2 years, or can they enter a seperate claim for compenssation for this? Will they need to take either party to court themselves rather than wait and see if FOS ever do anything about this?

Still with the OC as far as i am aware. He had a default issued but pretty sure it's still with the bank.

Sorry if i shouldn't be doing this but it seems they've been pulled from pillar to post and still getting messed about after all this time. Just wondered if anyone on the legal board could offer advice or suggestions to this post on the Barclays board. An Insurance claim which has been going on for over 3 years, possibly a business account used to pay a balance on another account (didn't know they could do that with business accounts) and after all that time still unsure if they can claim interest or compensation for the messing about they've had to go through. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bank/185938-sorry-its-long-one.html