I requested a settlement figure last year and Swift provided one with charges added to it. I had never missed or been late with a payment, so I couldn't understand why there were charges to my account. There were charges for late payments, bounced DDs, letters at £23 each, and even a £23 charge for reading a letter sent by my solicitor to them lodging a complaint. Last month I made a complaint through their website and received a letter saying that I was right and that the charges with interest would be reimbursed. I haven't had a statement yet to show that this has been done yet, but hopefully my account has been rectified.

Thanks for the advice. When I handed the goods back, they said they were keeping the deposit to cover slight damage to it, and that was all they said - no mention of outstanding balance until now (14 months later)

Hi, I took out a HP agreement for 36 months in August 2008, and kept payments up to date for 11 months, but then I had to return back the goods and stop paying as I could no longer afford it. I had no communication from the supplier of the goods for over a year, but today I received a statement saying that I owe them the remaining 25 months, which is £2,937.50 Can they ask for this full amount. If I were to pay it, they would have all the money under the HP agreement and the goods, and I would have nothing. Surely this cannot be right.

That last post made me laugh. Emmetts offering to re-audit agreements? They must be joking. They are the reason that a lot of us on here lost money paying Ratio Money for our first audit. I'm not legally trained, but even I could see that the so-called breaches contained in my agreement, simply weren't there. You are right Billy Goat Gruff, these people are total clowns. Stay well away everyone.

No, the debt is still with the original creditor.

I thought this might be the case. What grounds is it possible to set aside a CCJ? The credit agreement was enforceable, and the Default Notice was also compliant, so I'm not sure how I could have the judgement set aside?

Hi, I have read this thread with great interest. I was wondering if this method of full and final can be used where a creditor has already obtained a CCJ. The reason I ask is if the letter and cheque are sent to the creditor and they cash the cheque, thus accepting the contract written in the letter, then would this contract supersede a court judgement?

just a quick update - received my third default notice from Nationwide this week. They have fixed one of the problems in that they ask for the arrears this time, not the whole balance. But, yet again they have not allowed sufficient time to remedy the default. The default was issued 19th May, and asked for the arrears to be paid by November 2009!!! As this date is before the default was issued, they are obviously not allowing fourteen days to pay the arrears!!

just to update you - received my third default notice from Nationwide this week. They have fixed one of the problems in that they ask for the arrears this time, not the whole balance. But, yet again they have not allowed sufficient time to remedy the default. The default was issued 19th May, and asked for the arrears to be paid by November 2009!!! As this date is before the default was issued, they are obviously not allowing fourteen days to pay the arrears!!

Hi moneymummy1 just one phonecall from KPR, and a letter from them threatening charging order - both ignored. I hope that your parents get well soon Kind Regards socleirigh

Hi, I also was PMd by same journalist. Gave him some info. by PM and have agreed to talk to him, as I am annoyed at Ration Money's handling of my case and no refund being forthcoming

Sorry, I might not have been clear in my previous post - I didn't mean to take the lenders to court to get agreement deemed unenforceable, I meant to allow the lender to be the claimant as if they cannot provide a compliant agreement under CPR before court, then they are unlikely to get the agreement enforced Regards socleirigh

You're right, it looks like the whole industry is gone. I lost £295 with Ratio Money and £900 with Clear Your Finance, who I also think went into administration. If you have an unenforceable agreement you can do it yourself, with help from other members of this site. Regards socleirigh

The creditor is Swift Advances and its a secured loan so I made sure not to miss any payments. However, the original loan was £15,000 and I have been paying £238 for three years and a recent redemption figure was £14,777. I am subscribed to threads about Swift Advances who are a complete rip-off in the second charge loans market.

I finally got full confirmation from the panel solicitor today that they will not be proceeding with the case. The letter states, "Having reviewed your file and sought specialist Counsel (Barrister) advice. It would appear unfortunately Counsel is of the view that you have less than a 50% chance of success in achieving a Declaration of Unenforceability should the matter proceed to court. The prospect of success is reduced as the courts have now tested a small number of claims and their findings are clear. Claims with a prescribed term breach do not have a discretion and the court must find them unenforceable. Claims likes yours have what is termed a discretionary breach and therefore the courts are unlikely to make such a declaration. They may decide to make a small financial adjustment on the agreement which may result. However due to the costs of litigating claims such as these we are unable to act under a Conditional Fee Agreement. Therefore Counsel is not prepared to proceed further with this case and we have been advised likewise. On that basis and for the above reason we do not intend to pursue this matter any further and will be closing your file at this office. We will inform Ratio Money of the same. We confirm you have no financial obligation towards our fees and we have not incurred any disbursements for which you are liable. Your file will be held in storage for a period of six years after which it will be destroyed. Please note you have the right to seek independent legal advice should you wish to do. Alternatively you may want to have your file reallocated to another panel solicitor via Ratio Money." So, it looks like I was right when I said that Emmett's audit was inaccurate when it said that there was a prescribed breach. It's a year this week since I started this process. Very frustrating. Regards socleirigh

Has Paragon Finance actually obtained a CCJ, or have they just issued proceedings. If they have already obtained a CCJ, they should have produced the agreement in court. If it hasn't got to court yet, you can use valuable support on this site to defend a claim where the claimant does not have a bone fide agreement.

Hi davey77 the website was working as recently as last week, as I had to check I was dialling the correct number, but you-re right its not working now, which adds more weight to my thoughts that they no longer exist. I will contact trading standards as you suggest to see if they are still trading. Thanks for this idea. Regards socleirigh

I will be requesting a refund, as I too was advised that the fee was refundable if the claim did not proceed, although I won't be holding my breath waiting on it. Looks likw we have been ripped off. I had another three agreements audited by Clear Your Finance and have been trying to contact them to get £900 refunded, but no answer on the phone. Always get "user busy" message, even at 11.00pm! Kind Regards socleirigh

Moon Beever solicitors have advised that they have sent the file back to the Claims Management Company (Clear Your Finance) to check whether there may other grounds on which to claim. I have been trying to contact Clear Yopur Finance daily but always get a "user busy" message. I have even phoned at 11.00pm and still get the same message. I am starting to think that they no longer exist and I have lost £900 having three agreements audited by them last year. I still haven't heard from Northern Rock since the solicitor withdrew the claim, but expect that I will hear from them soon. Regards socleirigh

The second solicitor has now come back saying that the agreement looks enforceable, so £295 wasted. I wonder if I can claim this back from Ratio as they said that this fee is refundable if agreement found to be enforceable. socleirigh

Not sure if I posted this already on this thread or another, but my agreement was audited by Emmetts. They said the breach was that there was a charge in the "Amount of Credit" box, when quite clearly there wasn't, only the amount that I borrowed was in the box. I'm not legally qualified, but even I could see this mistake. Another firm of solicitors have it now, and hopefully there will be sufficient breaches in it to render it unenforceable, but Emmetts was amateurish in my opinion.

Don't have a landline and Iv've blocked their number on my mobile, so it doesn't even ring - just a missed call message when I next look at my phone.

Hi stevehatesbankers That sounds interesting. I've recently been told that the solicitors appointed by my CMC will not be pursuing my case any further, and I am now considering an IVA. However, if what you're saying above is correct, I would be more interested in settling at 25% instead of being tied into the IVA for five years. Do you know of anyone who has done this? Regards socleirigh

Hi, I phoned the solicitor to ask about this. They said that there is a breach, but they need to be at least 90% sure of success before issuing proceedings, and the technical point (which she couldn't explain) allows discrepancy so the chances of success are less then 90%, and therefore the ATE insurance has been withdrawn. I'm now considering an IVA as I have several other loans, which claims management companies originally said were unenforceable, but now they've all gone quiet after the Manchester test cases. Kind regards socleirigh

Hi Magda I thought that the interest had to stated (and stated correctly), and I had a firm of solicitors making a claim against Northern Rock for an inadequate interest clause. However, the solicitors wrote to me last week to say there has been a technical point raised in the lenders defence in simlar cases, which allows the court discretion on whether to enforce or not, and the Barrister doesn't think that discretion would be exercised in my favour, so they are not pursuing this "interest only" case as they call it. Not sure if this helps, I don't really understand what my solicitor means by this, and will be giving them a call. Kind regards socleirigh