Default Notices and Consumer Credit Act

[Jamesx81x]

Hi guys

 

When a company recinds and agreement on the back of an invalid default notice where is it exactly that it states that an invalid notice cannot be remedied by issuing a new one?

 

I ask as a creditor seems to think that is exactly what they are going to do!

 

Thanks

[Jamesx81x]

Anyone?

 

Its one thing to state it but what actually backs it up?

[Jamesx81x]

Anyone got anything on this?

 

To be able to say a company cannot issue a further default notice once the agreement has been terminated in a defence is one thing but what about when you are asked 'well where does it state that'.

 

Thanks guys

[andys123]

I'm looking for something along the same lines James. Various others on this site say to "sit tight" until a claim is brought against you and then declare a default as invalid (due to the date for instance) but seems risky to me!!!!!!

[royalscot]

Hi guys

 

When a company recinds and agreement on the back of an invalid default notice where is it exactly that it states that an invalid notice cannot be remedied by issuing a new one?

 

I ask as a creditor seems to think that is exactly what they are going to do!

 

Thanks

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?289449-Defaults-after-6-years-what-happens&highlight=DEFAULTS

 

Hi James

 

I came across this Thread a while back and in it The Experian Rep answers a question about Defaults being input a second time

 

Hope this helps , if not im sure if you pm him he will be able to help you

 

regards

 

rs

[FightToTheEnd]

Surely the point is that the DN gives you chance to rectify the situation before they terminate, ie if you pay the required amount then the account resumes as if the breach never happened. Once they have terminated then this can no longer be the case, hence the 2nd DN after termination is utter nonsense as even paying the amount due cannot "undo" the termination?

[Jamesx81x]

Thanks for the reply.

 

That is my view on it was just seeing if there is anywhere in the CCA and Consumer Regulations that actually state it.

 

I have a creditor that seems to think after discontinuing a cliam due to a defective default notice they are simply going to advise their client to re-instate the agreement and issue a new default notice therefore aloowing them to pursue legal action again.

 

In my view when an agreement is terminated whther unlawfully or lawfully it is terminated end of story?

 

Thanks

[FightToTheEnd]

I would imagine that they cannot lawfully re-instate the agreement without you agreeing to this, hence why you need to accept the termination, though court action already taken should be proof enough of the original termination. As you say, terminated is terminated and I dont see how they can unilaterally re-instate the agreement.

[Jamesx81x]

Again my point exactly but some companies and their solicitors seem to think the consumer credit act and associated regulations do not apply to them. They are just becoming an irritating noise as due to the fact they have no legal basis for bringing a cliam hence the discontinuation on their part they are looking for ways round it whether they be legitimate or not.

[MandM]

Hi,

 

As said above, 'terminated' gives them a problem with this. Has been covered in various threads including one of my own experiences. This should give you some ideas if you're looking to respond >>>>> http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?224300-MandM-vs-Egg-Loan-(MandM-**Won**-with-a-strikeout-of-the-claim-)&p=2954008&viewfull=1#post2954008

 

Good luck,

 

M

[Jamesx81x]

Thanks for the advice

 

Think will just let them crack on speaking crap and se how much of fools they make out of themselves