Currently, must an I&E statement be provided if a DCA requests?

[Hannay100]

I am approaching 68 with no savings or assets following a business collapse that also included our house being repossessed.

Our sole income is my Pension Credit entitlement, and we now live in rented accommodation covered by HB.

 

With the help of CAG I have so far been able to have 3 out of 7 related debts written off.

 

I have been asked at intervals for I&E statements.

I have always felt very strongly that these matters are nobody else’s business,

so have not filled-in their forms but have responded simply re-stating

our poor circumstances in general and referring back to the existing arrangement,

which has then always been accepted.

 

I have included I&E statements twice however when requesting reconsideration when a write-off request has been turned down.

 

Responses however were condescending and disagreeable, peppered with “we think this ..”, and “we feel that …” comments,

and saying we should try to save on this and on that because study-A and study-B

showed that typically a couple only needs to spend £X on food, £Y on power,

and an entire alphabet of “onlys” on other categories of daily living needs.

 

These responses however had no connection at all with the real world,

which only reinforces my firm belief that providing an I&E is simply digging a deeper hole

because it can always be selectively deconstructed and made to prove that black is white.

 

Which brings me to my question.

 

A DCA recently asked for an I&E.

I replied reasonably that for given circumstances I was unable to revise our existing arrangement which I could maintain.

I have just heard back, “requiring” me to comply and setting a 14 day time limit on a letter

that was already 8 days old when it arrived which is a very underhand

and nasty stress-ploy also seen from others multiple times.

 

I will be sending a robust reply, but first want to check whether any changes

have taken place that now oblige someone to provide an I&E when asked to do so.

 

Importantly,

if this is NOT the case can someone please point me toward any related code of conduct

or other source to which I can refer, pointing out that they are not entitled to demand an I&E.

 

If there is already a suitable form of words somewhere that I can use,

or if anyone more knowledgeable could find a moment to put a definitive sentence

or two together with suitable content that I can incorporate in my reply,

I should be additionally grateful.

 

With all thanks.

[Sidewinder]

The only time that you MUST provide an I&E is if it is required by a Court. A DCA will always try and 'order' you to produce one as their key aim is to maximise their income at the expense of your own. This is not a matter of law, but of privacy - you are under no legal obligation to provide financial details to a DCA, although in certain circumstances it can help with negotiations. They will say that they require the information so that their 'trained' chimps can help you to come up with an affordable repayment, but that is a smokescreen for trying to squeeze as much as they can from you.

 

Name and shame though. Who is this DCA which is trying to hoodwink you into parting with your personal information?

[dx100uk]

you are under no legal obligation to tell these fleecers anything

only a judge can order to see such info.

 

 

I hope these DCA's have had a CCA request & its been checked enforceable.

 

 

tell us about the debts

[fkofilee]

Yes do plz spill on these debts.

[brassnecked]

No legal compulsion to send any I & E unless a court claim form. A letter stating that as you are wholly reliant on benefits, and the Applicable Amount is laid down in Statute by the DWP, an I & E is inappropriate for families wholly reliant on benefits so you can only offer £1 per week/month. Personally I would send that and tell them go swivel.

 

What fleecing DCA is this?

[Hannay100]

Many thanks to all for that confirmation, much appreciated. I hadn't wanted to respond that there is no basis for their "requirement" if in fact circumstances had altered and they did indeed now have an entitlement to ask and be given. I will respond accordingly

 

The DCA is dlc

 

Sidewinder - Yes, very self-serving. Now referred to as a customer affordability statement it appears, sent out of the kindness of their heart because they would like to work with me. Sure.

 

Brassnecked - Thanks for the guideline wording and the logic behind it, very useful.

 

dx100uk & fkofilee - You are both mindreaders, I am just preparing to get on with the remaining debts and hopefully get similar results in due course. Watch this space

 

dx100uk - No it hadn't occurred to me that SAR was appropriate ... there had been a mortgage, there was eventually a significant default, repossession had followed after due process/court hearing/sympathetic attitude by the Judge, sale had left a shortfall which it clearly was going to do given the figures and the soft market then, and the debt appears legitimate and thereby enforceable ..

 

You feel maybe differently? I have no problem with sending a SAR if there's good reason, however I have no clue what I would need to look for in what comes back, how to interpret the formal language and put this and no doubt plenty of figurework in any useful context.

 

HOWEVER ...

 

.. On top of that the original Mortgage Lender was Southern Pacific Mortgages Limited, Later Capstone and now Acenden, and coincidentally when googling matters this morning coming from an answer to an unrelated question in a different part of this forum, I was led at one point in to a thread elsewhere that reports in some depth on an appallingly grim and extensively manipulative structure rooted in the Lehman collapse.

 

This shows a blatant and disturbing disregard by these same people for Borrowers, and a ground-up policy of aggressively pursuing defaults and repossessions via very shady actions barely this side of legal.

 

 

Frustratingly this introduces the issue that mortgages are not in fact owned by Acenden anyway but by something called Special Purpose Vehicles or SPVs, so presumably I have some more digging to do before being sure where a SAR would need to be sent ... all I get from dlc is "Acenden", and Acenden bounces back to dlc but apparently doesn't own the mortgage anyway though from the linked thread it appears possible to identify them independently with time and effort.

 

So is it your impression that despite the straightforward mortgage default/large arrear/repossession/disposal steps that were taken, the shortfall debt still could maybe stand some looking-at for enforceability? Again, I would have no idea what to be looking for in the box of papers that would be received!

[dx100uk]

sadly we cant carry external links to certain sites..

 

 

wherever Southern Pacific Mortgages Limited, Later Capstone and now Acenden

are involved

invariably there are penalty arrears etc etc to reclaim.

 

 

dx

[Hannay100]

dx100uk - Apologies for the delay responding ... the health matters of an elderly close relative are taking most of each day just now getting in to a new pattern after hospitalisation.

 

Thanks for the insight. With reclaims known to be buried in there I will go ahead with the SAR and then see what I can identify from what turns up.

 

Not sure whether Acenden will bounce it right back or will deal with it themselves or will pass it along to whichever SPV they are fronting for, but I suppose it will soon become evident!

 

Apologies for the inappropriate link, I saw a similar link to CAG from there, and assumed it was a reciprocal relationship so someone could find their way to all useful info when they were searching.