Cant pay at all, debtor's prison next?

[steve4kendal]

........................

Edited April 5, 2010 by steve4kendal
Photo link removed

[supasnooper]

Steve, I've removed the photo link.

 

See my PM.

[steve4kendal]

Seems like I'm snookered because I cant safely publish the requested info. I can however check the papers if I am told what to look for.

[cymruambyth]

Can you not stick bits of paper over anything that can identify you and then repost?

[steve4kendal]

Yes but the problem is that each picture has a link to my entire album!

[steve4kendal]

......................

Edited April 5, 2010 by steve4kendal
adding links now

[steve4kendal]

Just rang a local solicitor today. Receptionist says "of course we can do consumer credit cases, will ring you later" Did they heck!

So I've rung another after hours and left an urgent message with no details. Lets see...

Edited March 30, 2010 by steve4kendal
addition

[steve4kendal]

Any more docs required please?

[citizenB]

Just having a look back over your thread. I think the way the original loan was a bit suspect and you may be able to use the Unfair relationship angle.

 

BRB

 

Originally Posted by steve4kendal

Well before I even look, I know that there was no questionnaire or debate about the PPI. I did ask about the PPI because I had the 2 jobs then, but was assured that it was OK and mandatatory. The Loan (a)rranger knew that she was committing my entire income, but said there was no choice about it.

 

 

Ok so not only was PPI mis-sold but the actual loan may have been irresponsibly lending also. Does the paperwork you have show this clearly?

 

S.

 

This as The shadow says shows irresponsible lending.

Edited March 31, 2010 by citizenB
merged posts

[citizenB]

Ok, what can we do with the following.

 

You went into the branch in 2008 to discuss your overdraft.

 

You were persuaded to take out a loan in the sum of £10,500 which had a PPI policy of £4,500 .

 

Was this a £10,500 loan + £,4,500 PPI or

£6,000 loan + £4,500 PPI

 

The loan paid off the overdraft sum.

 

The loan arranger was aware of your circumstances ie Self employment but assured you that it was a suitable insurance and in any event, it was mandatory.

 

The loan arranger was also aware of your financial situation in that you had other debt commitments.

 

The loan arranger was aware that they were committing the whole of your disposable income to service the loan but said it was unavoidable.

 

In March 2009 your income took a downturn and in July 2009 , a £3,272.82 PPI rebate was refunded to the loan in respect of a complaint made by you. The PPI was then cancelled.

 

What was the nature of your complaint ? Did you mention mis selling at that time. eg, had you just discovered that the PPI would not cover you for unemployment.

 

However, as the PPI was obviously mis sold, then the entire amount of upfronted PPI should have been removed from the overall total of the loan/ppi and any payments already made to service the PPI part of the loan should have been refunded with any accrued interest. The loan should then have been restructured minus the PPI.

 

At no time were you advised that in the event of non payment, the bank would have at its disposal, the means to secure the loan upon your property.

 

You believe you were pressured into taking out this loan rather than the branch coming to an arrangement to repay the overdraft over a sensible period of time. How much of the overdraft incorporated monthly charges for over limit, returned debits etc.

 

Obviously it was in the bank's interest for you to have the loan + PPI as it would have generated far greater profits for them.

 

IMHO, I do not think there is any mileage in the Default notice UNLESS it was sent 2nd class post.

 

I think it was dated 3rd June 2009 and they sent you a formal demand on 23rd June. Although if you can advise the date of remedy on the Default notice.

 

IMHO, the bank was irresponsible in setting up the loan.

 

If you can go through the above, add any comments eg confirm that I have understood the situation accurately then perhaps we might be able to get something together for you by this afternoon.

 

 

[steve4kendal]

Hi the CB thanks for taking time to reply. I dont have long to address all your points, just on a short break, but I did have a return phone call this morning from a local solicitor. He soon sussed that i wasnt up for 2 hours @ £190/hour, but was kind enough to spend more than 8 minutes listening to the tale of woe. His conclusion is that I have attend the strike out hearing next Weds and he thinks that "I am not wasting my time" in trying to counter their claim, possibly on the grounds that I would never have taken the loan with dud insurance, so I am on my own now, with all assistance gratefully received.

[steve4kendal]

............................

Edited April 5, 2010 by steve4kendal

[steve4kendal]

I think I probably need a title? for the defence which I will submit if the judge agrees to an adjournment. The solicitor on the phone today said he would probably not grant one if he thought I was merely stalling in order to look for a legal loophole.

Edited March 31, 2010 by steve4kendal
spellcheck

[CBR600F]

Bankers bonuses.

MPs expenses.

I can't think exactly why these come to mind.........

LOL

 

I know that doesn't help but may bring a smile:D

[steve4kendal]

Yes, ta for the smile, but it will be a lot broader if someone helps me to "spank the banker" :grin:

[citizenB]

Have sent you a pm. Hope that helps.

[steve4kendal]

....................

Edited April 5, 2010 by steve4kendal

[avatari]

Steve, don't have time to check all 192 posts, so please just reacap what info, whether SAR, CCA or whatever, you have requested from them and on what dates. You may also be able to argue they have been reticent, if not unlawful, with providing you with the data you need to support this defence.

[steve4kendal]

Steve, don't have time to check all 192 posts, so please just reacap what info, whether SAR, CCA or whatever, you have requested from them and on what dates. You may also be able to argue they have been reticent, if not unlawful, with providing you with the data you need to support this defence.

..............................

Edited April 5, 2010 by steve4kendal
spelling

[babybear39]

Contact the ICO immediately re non compliance of SAR.

[steve4kendal]

Ok

[avatari]

You need to put together an historical narrative of their failure to provide you with the information you need to defend this claim. This should build to give the judge a compelling picture of how the claimant has been obstructive and unreasonable, not to mention clearly in breach of their lawful obligations. Can you post up your intended defence for comment?

[steve4kendal]

...........................

Edited April 5, 2010 by steve4kendal
CLAIMANTS SOLS ARE WATCHING

[diddydicky]

personally i dont think the judge will be too interested in the circumstances surrounding how you ended up with the loan- and will rule as to whether you have to pay it back or not

 

Your very appearance in court as a LIP is likely to persuade him that you aint as dumb as you portray in having your hands bent up your back to take out the loan without knowing what you were doing

 

(devils advocate)

[steve4kendal]

personally i dont think the judge will be too interested in the circumstances surrounding how you ended up with the loan- and will rule as to whether you have to pay it back or not

 

Your very appearance in court as a LIP is likely to persuade him that you aint as dumb as you portray in having your hands bent up your back to take out the loan without knowing what you were doing

 

(devils advocate)

 

Point taken. So, do I not bother going to the strike out hearing and just wait for summary judgement?