Go Back   Big Tattoo Planet Community Forum > Chit Chat
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 28-07-2008, 05:41 PM   #21
J_R
Jedi Chat Master
 
J_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Linton Travel Tavern
Posts: 3,901
Default

I'd find it hard to believe that the CAB would recommend a financial company that would charge; it's against their ethos.

But who knows! lol
J_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2008, 06:46 PM   #22
Chat Slut
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: In a flat with 2 cats (and Geoff)
Posts: 222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vogelrok View Post
correct CAB are free. but what about Payplan. they cant be doing it for nothing.
They are free, they're the Consumer Credit Council, Payplan is just their debt management arm.
__________________
Two hundred tons of petrochemicals diverted from where they belong – in the tank of my car – to puff up a chocolate egg so small that it wouldn’t stretch the birthing muscles of a wren.
Alhandra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2008, 07:00 PM   #23
Bring on the Trumpets!!
 
vogelrok's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: http://www.vogeltattoo.co.uk/
Posts: 10,656
Default

wasn't sure as i know all other debt management agencies charge a fee.

even so. this thread really wasn't about the debt it self but the mark it leaves behind once you are in an agreed payment plan or what ever way it is dealt with.

you didnt get taken to court to sort it out, which is what a default note is placed on your file for. its not because you missed the payment, it is to advice others that a court case is going to take place. what even 6yrs later i have to ask myself.
vogelrok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2008, 07:07 PM   #24
J_R
Jedi Chat Master
 
J_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Linton Travel Tavern
Posts: 3,901
Default

That's incorrect

I believe it is a notification that you are in arrears and may therefore be subject to court proceedings, but Payplan say this -

Quote:
A default notice is formal notification from a creditor or lender that you are in arrears.
J_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2008, 07:22 PM   #25
Bring on the Trumpets!!
 
vogelrok's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: http://www.vogeltattoo.co.uk/
Posts: 10,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_R View Post
That's incorrect

I believe it is a notification that you are in arrears and may therefore be subject to court proceedings, but Payplan say this -

they haven't taken me to court. so they are placing defaults without taking up court action. because they dont have the correct paperwork in place to do so. this then make the whole marker a libel statement. as there is no cca1974 to us in court.

no cca1974 signed by both parts with interest rates terms and conditions of the cca1974, amount borrowed and amount due at the end of the trem.

without these it is no longer a debt.

placing a marker on someone file without proff of a cca1974 and adding interest is a libel statement.

the creditor neesds to have cast iron proof the debt exsists. saying you owe it and saying you have made payments in the past, don't mean you owe it. not once a debt has been sold with out passing over the orginal cca1974 agreement you countersigned.

the cra beleive the creidtor when they say yes we own the debt and have the right to collect.
vogelrok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2008, 07:28 PM   #26
J_R
Jedi Chat Master
 
J_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Linton Travel Tavern
Posts: 3,901
Default

A default doesn't mean they have to take you to court, it means that you have defaulted a payment, and that court action could result.

Yes, a valid credit agreement must exist for them to take any action on you as a debtor. But you would have to contest the default at the time of issue. And I would imagine that any further payment would prove your acceptance of monies owing, although this would be discretionary in a court.
J_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2008, 07:51 PM   #27
Bring on the Trumpets!!
 
vogelrok's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: http://www.vogeltattoo.co.uk/
Posts: 10,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_R View Post
A default doesn't mean they have to take you to court, it means that you have defaulted a payment, and that court action could result.

Yes, a valid credit agreement must exist for them to take any action on you as a debtor. But you would have to contest the default at the time of issue. And I would imagine that any further payment would prove your acceptance of monies owing, although this would be discretionary in a court.
well thats your understanding of the law. you almost sound like the twat (not calling you a twat before you take this the wrong wat) im having to deal with at the CRA. he is relly on reg 3 of the debts and collection act 1983 to be used. the Trading Standards has proved that reg 7 of the same act over rides reg 3.

if there is no legal binding consumer credit agreement it cant be taken to court., if it can't be taken to court then it can be placed upon your credit file.

im no lawyer. but have been studying many laws for the past 2yrs. consumer credit and the data protection act also the disability disgrimination act1995/2005amended.

if there is no signed agreement the debt does not exsist anymore. like some one at your mortgage company tearing up the contrat. once it is gone it is gone. prove that i havent paid it. would be my move. why because they fucked up. they havent so i havent been that lucky. but i did get £2226.57 back from them for unlawful charges not more that 2 months ago.

i offered to pay the money back at a smaller amount barclaycard said sorry £20 a month is no good. they refused to accept monies every mointh till the debt was clear. the debt has been in dispute since day one. they ask me to pay i make an offer they refuse it. what do you think a judge might say to that one. he should tell them to go fuck themselfs with a big stick. why didn't you take the mans money he offered.


i know im not going to lose. why should i i have just forced the company that has placed my home under the threat of a cpo to buy a house and adapt it for a disabled person. £200,000 its going to cost them. all because the guy was being nasty towards my disabled wife.

also im sorry to go on but by what stat law do the cra's and dcas abide by. none is the answer.

if you dont want to hel;p fight for the people that need help then don't. i aint forcing anyone. there are people that need help. this country is fucked due to cra's in this country. just like the ones in america. thgouigh not quite the same. its time for the common man to stand shoulder to shoulder and be counted as a man of the people before we fall head long into a pit of shit.

who regulates CRAs.....the fact is that no one does and they operate as businesses with no specific criteria given to them under stat law.All the more reasons why they should be taken on-given that they will continue to play to their own rules until they are taken to task.
vogelrok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2008, 07:55 PM   #28
J_R
Jedi Chat Master
 
J_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Linton Travel Tavern
Posts: 3,901
Default

I'm no expert on credit law, but contracts do not need to be signed, or even written down.

Regardless, your situation sounds most unfortunate, and I wish you the best of luck in the outcome
J_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2008, 08:04 PM   #29
Bring on the Trumpets!!
 
vogelrok's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: http://www.vogeltattoo.co.uk/
Posts: 10,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_R View Post
I'm no expert on credit law, but contracts do not need to be signed, or even written down.

Regardless, your situation sounds most unfortunate, and I wish you the best of luck in the outcome

please dont think im pissed at you. it just makes me look more into the law with each arguement that comes back with regards to it. long and short of it. most people make a offer to all there creditors. but it gets refused.

when you see banks getting £50 million pouund hand outs then they give themselfs a £13billion pound bonus. knowing the £50million is from the tax payers. it kind of shits on all effical moral gorunds.

as i say J R there is no bad feelings towards you at all. im ofd the believing if you have done wrong and get caught you do your time and end of.

agree to disagree i think is the case here.

come on though lets look at it this way. how many cons get away scott free because of loop holes in the law
these are not loop holes in the law we are using it is the law we are using. they are abusinbg it so they must be the cons.

set them up a peter they will be along soon arrows and all.
vogelrok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-07-2008, 08:06 PM   #30
J_R
Jedi Chat Master
 
J_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Linton Travel Tavern
Posts: 3,901
Default

It's cool fella; no hard feelings

I'm 100% behind you with the baking thing though.

I agree to a small extent with fining for overspend, but the amounts and the frequency is just crazy, and the banks should be paying every penny back for their disgraceful conduct alone
J_R is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Reclaiming bank charges limpet Chit Chat 42 31-10-2008 12:13 PM
OT.... bank punitive charges on your accounts vogelrok Chit Chat 103 30-05-2008 12:03 AM
O/T Bank charges take it to number one. vogelrok Chit Chat 0 28-11-2007 04:03 PM
(OT) I hate my bank! Dahlia Black Chit Chat 49 07-01-2006 04:47 PM


SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.