Welcome upping their game with dca collection

[brassed-off-2]

while account is in dispute NO action should be taken...and the account should not be passed to a third party.(FSA &OFT RULES)

If they are demanding full payment then they have terminated the agreement.

The main point to work on is when these agreements were signed and dated.SO are we looking at the CCA1974 or the ammended version.....

 

So where do we go from here now? Still no NOA off WFS / EC OR UK SEARCH!!

 

Experto Credite letter received by us 21/10 demanding £24.5k in full within 7 days.

EC threatmonkey rings us, and gets sent off with bee in his ear on 3/11.

5/11 letter received by us dated 1/11 off another dca called uk search limited, using more threatening remarks to payup in full but no date to pay by.

 

Needless to say, no rely as of yet to letter sent off us to EC, and same letter going off to uksearch first thing in the morning....

[mark1arby]

Everybody should read at least some of this thread. It relates to how things have recently changed for the Original Creditor and how they can now go about debt collection. All the things that the **** couldn`t do a year or so ago, when we began our complaints Odyssey, they can do now.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?240186-Dissecting-the-Manchester-Test-Case....&highlight=manchester

 

This is part of the thread that i think concerns us the most. May be I am wrong and totally out of order. I don`t want to cause any body to regret anything they have done in pursuit of these **** *ucks. I have stopped paying and will not pay anything more until a court decides if I am right or not. This is not such a worry as to change everything we do, because if my reading of the `Manchester Cases` ruling is correct, with out A `Properly Executed` agreement they can not enforce it even in a Court of Law. That is still down to the `Judge Lottery`.

 

What I do think is, that these changes are fundamental to a lot of the `Stickies` and threads on CAG, which were promulgated before the `Manchester Cases`, and which are the source people get their information. People are taking the OFT and Trading Standards advice as sacrosanct and this is obviously no longer the case. This also changes, in my view drastically, a lot of the letters in the `Templated Letters` in the CAG Library. These along with the `Stickies` need to be looked at by the Site Team and made more pertinant to the situation as it stands now.

 

"And if and when the s78 breach is cured, the creditor may sue him and recover all outstanding amounts. Moreover, during the breach period the creditor can still report the debtor to credit reference agencies (“CRAs”) without the need to tell them that the agreement is currently unenforceable. It can demand payment from the debtor or instruct a third party to do so and can issue a default notice. None of that constitutes “enforcement”. The only restriction on the creditor is that he cannot, after starting proceedings, obtain a judgment which enforces the agreement. So he cannot obtain a judgment sum, a charging order to enforce that judgment or make the debtor bankrupt".

 

Cheers Mark

[mark1arby]

Sorry, just a quick one. The above was re-enforced to us yesterday when we received a phone call from the Adjudicator at FOS. He called to confirm receipt of the copies of the letters from Incasso we had sent. He stated that he is not involved any more with our case as it is awaiting an Ombudsman but he will pass this stuff on when an Ombudsman is allocated. ( what good is that)? He also said in response to the letter " Welscum are entitled to chase you for thier money You Know"!!!! What the *UCK GOOD the FOS are I don`t know.

 

We are certainly up against it now!!! BUT *UCK `EM!!! I`m up for it and back in the fight now.

 

Cheers Mark

[BEBOBEBO]

Sorry, just a quick one. The above was re-enforced to us yesterday when we received a phone call from the Adjudicator at FOS. He called to confirm receipt of the copies of the letters from Incasso we had sent. He stated that he is not involved any more with our case as it is awaiting an Ombudsman but he will pass this stuff on when an Ombudsman is allocated. ( what good is that)? He also said in response to the letter " Welscum are entitled to chase you for thier money You Know"!!!! What the *UCK GOOD the FOS are I don`t know.

 

We are certainly up against it now!!! BUT *UCK `EM!!! I`m up for it and back in the fight now.

 

Cheers Mark

 

Mark this is what Ive been saying for months no matter what status our accounts are in FOS or not THEY CAN AND WILL CHASE for these debts. More shocking is Ive read a few articles one being Martin Lewis that even if a contract is wrong the creditor just needs to amend it for it to become forceble again.

 

Im at a stage now where I know I wont get far with the FOS and its gonna be a case of damage limitation, Im certainly not gonna let some two bit DCA who is holding the Deeds to my house take it away from me because believe me they will.

 

I go back to my age old question. How many Unenforceble Welscum agreements have you seen on here that have been proven by a Judge ??

 

Yes I do sound negative and you would be right in thinking yes ive kind of given up. End of the day its a very expensive lesson learned I signed the contract I was happy to get the money. Its me who is the Idiot.

 

The people that advised me in the early stages of my complaint should be ashamed of them themselves and in my eyes are worst then the **** we are fighting and further more these people are STILL advising the same rubbish on here. Im gobsmacked that these people are still allowed the post on here. they should be banned for life.

 

This maybe me signing out now, If it is I wish all of you the best of luck in your cases.

 

Bebo x

[brassed-off-2]

So where do we go from here now? Still no NOA off WFS / EC OR UK SEARCH!!

 

Experto Credite letter received by us 21/10 demanding £24.5k in full within 7 days.

EC threatmonkey rings us, and gets sent off with bee in his ear on 3/11.

5/11 letter received by us dated 1/11 off another dca called uk search limited, using more threatening remarks to payup in full but no date to pay by.

 

Needless to say, no rely as of yet to letter sent off us to EC, and same letter going off to uksearch first thing in the morning....

 

 

Just to update on the above on 8/11 we received yet another letter from Expert Credite, the balance remains the same £24.5k, so no dca charges added???

They say that despite attempts to contact us directly by letter and telephone..(2 calls, o/h said in writing only, 3rd and 4th recorded messages ..no person!!) letter goes on to say as it looks like you are not going to make payment towards clearing this debt we have no other option than to recommend our client that they commence legal proceedings...bla!! blah!!

 

now i am still confused, as if i was willing and able to pay £24.5k at the drop of a hat, would i pay welscum? experto credite?? or uk search ltd??

 

Experto credite still havent had the courtesy of replying to our proove yourselves letter???

[brassed-off-2]

this may be of use for some of us with ppi issues for contracts pre 2005..

http://www.fscs.org.uk/news/2010/november/update-on-cattles-plc-and-welco-nfx7mimd/index.html

[dadofholly]

An interesting post

 

Thanks

[Sand-Dancer0191]

PUZZLED....Why from 14 jan 05

 

WHY not all outstanding

No time limit for PPI claims

Claims for mis-selling come under the exclusions for: "mistakes, concealment and fraud" s.32 limitation act 1980.

[dadofholly]

PUZZLED....Why from 14 jan 05

 

WHY not all outstanding

No time limit for PPI claims

Claims for mis-selling come under the exclusions for: "mistakes, concealment and fraud" s.32 limitation act 1980.

 

Thats for missold claims against the original creditor - but the fscs would just be picking up the pieces for the last 6 years.

[Sand-Dancer0191]

True BUT welcome are the original creditor.

IF the fscs are assisting in the clean up why leave loose ends

[dadofholly]

True BUT welcome are the original creditor.

IF the fscs are assisting in the clean up why leave loose ends

 

Without checking out the fscs my guess would be its just simply in their rules/regulations, that they have a cut off point. Why? i cant answer - but if its the regs then thats what they will go by.