And I also get your point, but in order to settle on low %, you really need to give them an incentive. He cannot claim the ppi and then say he has no money? They will know he has the money before he does. At which point there is no query, what incentive do they have to offer a 25% f&f as you recommended? All I can see is him having no query and more money than he started with?

But you get the point?

Or in simpler terms if somebody owes you ten pounds and they say they only have five, will you accept that, they then pay with a ten pounds note and ask you for change?

No your correct in what you say, but f&fs are used to either resolve a dispute or settle nested of arrangement. The way they will look at it, you have offered x amount, so if you reclaim ppi, you now also have y amount. So you have both x and y at your disposal to pay. You now cannot say you only have x to pay. So they will be less likely to offer a reduction on balance minus ppi.

sent you a message, you may find interesting

are you still on the website? Thats a hell of a lot of money for what is essentially no advertising

when you say the original advert didnt have the correct numbers on it? Did you advertise in the book? Were thos numbers correct?

I agree with that they are reluctant, however in this occasion he has made payment to arrow. We dealt with hundreds of these when dealing with arrow, I know a few were recalled but generally we were holding while claiming and then asking to use funds to clear. However more were settled through negotiating settlement terms without a claim. Arrow encouraged us not to offer f&fs on accounts that have been subject to a ppi claim.

When they are offering to pay?

This was arrows policy on the whole ppi issue, haven't had anything to do with them for a while, but may have changed, although if there is a possibility of settling, I very much doubt they will pass back

Having dealt with this situation before, I would assume that arrow will not do that. They will say sort out the ppi claim with egg, then use the money to pay off the remainder of the debt. I will be very surprised if they suggest any different. The debt has been sold, I don't think they offer a money back guarantee. As far as I remember arrow let dra s offer 50% f&fs so may settle themselves for less than that, although if you have let them know you are offering f&f and claiming ppi, then they are going to be less likely to offer a larger reduction because they know you have original f&f amount plus money claimed via ppi.

Contact your bank. I really do not see why you would feel like a theif? The whole point of advertising is that it generates business for you. If your advert doesnt have your shop name, or even your telephone number, they are not advertising you, they are advertising something else. Legally they have no leg to stand on. In the 0.00001% chance that they would look to sue (you will have more chance of being run over by a train while on an aeroplane) They have already proved themselves to be wrong with the thousands of books they have sent out. and website. Not only tha, t they havent offered you a service. Its like going to buy a car and being given a packet of tic tacs (extreme but you get the idea). Thats not what you bought, now they are trying to pressurise you into paying for what you didnt want in the first place. You have done nothing wrong.

To add... if it was me I would also raise an indemnity claim for the £60 odd. If you are not going to pay the rest of it, then there is very little point in them having that too.

Agree with the above, if you believe this to be false (unfair), then thats what the bodies are for. However it would be interesting to find out where the payment came from. OCs a "file" to DRA, which has actually got not got a lot of info. Last payment is generally one of the notes, together with default date. Until the dig out the records, then they actually do have no idea where it has come from. You will not to be surprised to know with this limited info a lot of it is, shall we say off the cuff.

Have you read the paperwork that you have signed? One of my friends had exactly the same experience will yell. I actualy wrote a letter to them for him (unfortunaetely on his PC) From what I remember I said something along the lines of "I can only assume by the fact that you have falsified the contact details of my company, that you have done so in a ploy to sabotage my business" I then went on to accuse them of the "possibilty" that they could be involved in backhand dealings with other traders in my area. Stated that my legal representative was looking into how it was in breach of the control of misleading advertisements regulations 1988, and would be bringing it to the attention of the IBA. Never heard anything else

I would be inclined to just ignore it. I think they are trying "one last time". If you are worried, send a I do not acknowledge letter, and you require proof of debt including transactions. I think they will find it near on impossible to get that info before SB limit. Eith that or write a letter asking for their internal complaints procedure (OFT have expressly asked DRAs to put accounts on hold for at least a month in these occasions )

Arrow are a top client of fredricksons group, and they have been known to go hand in hand

well put Although can I clarify above Bank of Scotland and the Royal Bank of Scotland are two totally different corporations, if contacting please ensure it is the correct one.

Is it not bank of Scotland?

Why would she contact RBS?

Unless the company "who took is on" purchased the debt, they would have made no addition to your credit file. Who actually owns the debt? I would presume from the wording in their letter that you posted that they do. In which case they are probably just trying the flog a dead horse. No record.. no payment. How can you be sure that its yours? you cant... Take it that it isnt.

IN the DRA industry Arrow are known for their settlements, and are actually one of the quicker ones in getting things resolved. Arrow are a seperate outfit to Fredricksons. In my oppinion (may be wrong) you want to use the fact that ppi is still in the balance to your advantage. Use that as a method of dispute, therfore giving them a reason to settle on the best terms, Always start low, just as they will start high. The lower you start, the lower the middle ground is.

Bank of scotland would have registered with CRA.

Imagine how many people didnt

Didnt happen to be vanquis or similar did it? heard of several occasions, when they haven't even registered with CRA. Agree with above, either SB, or if the had anything paperwork wise, then they would have at least registered with CRA (its a bargaining tool). On the upside at least you will have lots of envelopes from 1st credit to write your shopping list on the back of.