Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

[Legal Beagles]

Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

Category: Campaigns

Recently we have seen an influx of County Court claims and Statutory Demands against debtors who stopped making payments to their debts following a mass of publicity surrounding claims that debts could be deemed unenforceable due to non compliance with requests for information under sections 77 to 79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. In 2008/09 a number of ‘ambulance chaser’ companies set up in this controvertial market, including the more well known ones Cartel Client Review, The Claims Warehouse and Ratio Money. There was a lot of publicity surrounding the claims of people like Basil Rankine and Carl Wright that your debts could be written off – culminating in a high profile test case ( Carey v HSBC 2009) These companies charged up front fees of Ł300 – Ł900 per debt and told consumers they should stop making payments as their credit agreements were unenforceable under a later revoked section 127(3) part of the CCA 1974. These fees were to be refunded if the debt was found to be enforceable. Many were, and debtors weren’t told, and stopped making payments, and in extreme cases made payments to the claims companies instead of their creditors!. Those companies have all but closed down now, many of the people involved have moved into other areas – PPI claims, Debt Management plans, IVA’s etc.
But what about those people who stopped paying their debts on the say so of these companies? Is there any redress available to them ?
Are creditors now beginning to enforce these debts through threat of bankruptcy and CCJ’s, charging orders and enforcement agents ?
If you stopped paying your debts on the say so of one of these claims companies then we’d like to hear from you. Did you get your fees refunded ? Have your creditors made further claims against you? Join the forum and post here with your experiences.
LB have a forum specifically to help you with any issues relating to agreements regulated under the Consumer Credit Act.
Please create a new thread HERE and ask any questions and outline your circumstances.
DO NOT JUST STOP PAYING YOUR CREDITORS WITHOUT ADVICE.
WE DO NOT CONDONE DEBT AVOIDANCE
The CCA is a useful tool to help get your debts back to the original creditor and obtain fair treatment and have serious issues addressed. It is NOT a ‘get out of debt free ‘card.

Read more at: http://legalbeagles.info/did-you-sto...#ixzz2zcg8YN00

[Guest]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

Would it surprise anyone to know that there are still advisers on forums not a million miles away who advise members to stop paying on none production of copy agreements.

Of course there is no redress available for people falling foul this erroneous information.

Some would say that there is a difference when the perpetrator is making a profit from the misinformation, but as far as the debtor is concerned he still ends up in the same position, so it is not that different really.

That is why IMO it is important to get your facts right when giving advice, unless of course it is made clear that what you are stating is opinion only.

[Amethyst]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

I know. I don't think we've ever advised anyone to stop paying off the back of a dodgy CCA - it's always been 'use it to get the debt sorted' rather than ' stop paying and try and wing it for six years' but that is by the by. What I am wondering on is if people who are now receiving the fallout (as debts are passed to debt collectors before the limitation act kicks in) have ANY sort of redress against the paid for 'advice' from claims management companies like Cartel and co ? Trouble is most have shut down anyway - but upfront fees were refunded under section 75 claims to the credit card providers (bizarrely usually the ones they stopped paying) so is there any redress on that route ? Probably not but worth having a look into?

I have no idea how widespread it is just know I've seen a number of cases across different forums where people stopped paying around that time starting to get the court action now.

[Guest]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

I am not sure that people would have a claim TBH.

Before, many were insure about the position regarding section 78 claims, when the case clarified the position all these claims fell away, but were the solicitors that were pushing this incorrect information liable? In that at the time the advice was given the validity of the argument was unresolved one way or the other.

[jon1965]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

What exactly do you mean by sorting out a debt as opposed to not paying. If a non compliant cca request lands on your doorstep or even better a letter saying they haven't got one what do you suggest?
Being practive and asking a court to declare the debt UE is where these cmcs fell down and is not something to be advised, but surely you are not saying carry on paying a UE debt.
IMO if it is non compliant you tell them it is non compliant and stop paying until a compliant one arrive , if they tell you they havent got one they should also be saying its UE. The new fca handbook even says now that the creditors have to tell you that while in default of a cca request the debt is UE.

As an aside over on cag the advice has gone full circle from keep paying as paperwork errors dont matter to no cca no pay.

I think we also need to remember that a creditor will probably try court action if for some reason they think they may get judgement. So if you have not talked to them in 4 or 5 years they may just try to get judgement on a UE debt by default. The motto of the story is, if a claim arrives do not ignore

[Guest]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

I think that what people decide to do upon the delivery of a none compliant section 78 request is upto them.

Legally however there is no justification for ceasing to pay, the debt is still due and any contractual debt is still drawing interest at the contractual rate, even if they are failing to comply.

So if and when they do comply any arrears generated within the period of none compliance will be due.

[Amethyst]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

Not really a(nother) discussion on the ins and outs of the CCA (agree with andy58 tho '' I think that what people decide to do upon the delivery of a none compliant section 78 request is upto them.'') - it's more on the people who got caught up in the Rankine / Wright / Ferguson cuffuffles.

Quote:

what about those people who stopped paying their debts on the say so of these companies? Is there any redress available to them ?

Are creditors now beginning to enforce these debts through threat of bankruptcy and CCJ’s, charging orders and enforcement agents ?

[mystery1]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

Legally however there is no justification for ceasing to pay, the debt is still due and any contractual debt is still drawing interest at the contractual rate, even if they are failing to comply.

There is a "justification" it's 78(6). The justification is not a permanent solution but it could be. Each person has their own moral line and has to make that choice but if the law says the lender has a problem, all be it that this might be temporary, then i think you are wrong to say the debtor is unjustified to take a particular course of action based upon this. Yes you have to be prepared that the situation changes against you but to say this action is unjustified is misleading.

As for advice not to pay in general, some people claim success in this using whatever method they think will work. The truth of the matter is that unless the lender bins your account (not sell, bin) then success is dependant on reaching the statute barred date. Most accounts haven't yet got there.

M1

[Guest]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

There is a "justification" it's 78(6). The justification is not a permanent solution but it could be. Each person has their own moral line and has to make that choice but if the law says the lender has a problem, all be it that this might be temporary, then i think you are wrong to say the debtor is unjustified to take a particular course of action based upon this. Yes you have to be prepared that the situation changes against you but to say this action is unjustified is misleading.

As for advice not to pay in general, some people claim success in this using whatever method they think will work. The truth of the matter is that unless the lender bins your account (not sell, bin) then success is dependant on reaching the statute barred date. Most accounts haven't yet got there.

M1

I think perhaps you overlooked the word legally at the beginning of the quote.

Legally the temporary inability to enforce does not in any way interfere with the agreement either being in force nor does it interrupt the operation of interest.

Once the agreement copy is produced, all sums that were due during the none compliant period would be due, plus any default charges which would be incurred by any suspense of repayment, the failure to produce a copy will not stop default charges being applied.

[jon1965]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

I was not just talking about non response to a cca request or even a non compliant response but also when the agreement that is sent is irredeemably UE. So what I was asking was, what do you mean by sorting it out as opposed to stop paying when a S77/78 request provides an agreement that is irredeemably UE.
It seems very unusual for a creditor to actual write off or bin the debt, most seem to do the rounds until either the account becomes SB or the debtor dies.
I have a strong suspicion that within the next year or two there will be a lot of claims made and a lot of judgements by default .

This to me is the main argument, yes I realise that they can put together a compliant S77/78 request or at least claim to . My debts are probably split 50:50 between irredeemable and S77/78 non compliant .

[Mr $quandaŁot]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

Don't be silly.

Some of us like me have never signed up to a mastercard and agreed to ever-increasing interest rates!

If the banks cocked up and don't didn't respect the law whose fault is it? Most of us have paid anyway, with ridiculous interest rates and then those ba$tard$ feel like upping them every six months.

Enough is enough!!!

[Amethyst]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

As I mentioned earlier, we're really interested in people who were told / encouraged to stop paying their debts due to contact with a claims management firm - whether that advice was correct or not - and whether it has led to further financial problems. I'm probably asking in the wrong place really.

[mystery1]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

Like all advice to stop paying, only court action, a letter saying the debt was finished or statute barred court give a "result" of the action or inaction. If an impasse or silence is ongoing no result either way is known. Most people will either be no worse off (yet) or be taken to court. It is unlikely, but not impossible, that people who were not in trouble took this route. Aside from court action, the only other way to be worse off so far is charges by cartel etc.

M1

[Mr $quandaŁot]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

Sharon, to some extent you are missing the point here.

Indirectly, most of us stopped paying thanks to the claim management companies as they were the ones who made people aware of the relevant sections of CCA 1974.

I've never paid anything to those companies. At that time, my finances were still more or less ok.

Recession of 2008-13 hit me and many others hard. Entering a DMP or contacting Step Change etc. would have been silly.

By advising certain people not to pay - depending on circumstances etc. - you are not doing anything illegal or even morally questionable. Since when have banks had any morals?

Please remember, we all had to contribute to the RBS bailout. Their default was far worse than all non-paying UE defaulters put together. Why should we pay yet again?

Unlike RBS, we ordinary people don't have anyone to bail us out. Oh, I nearly forgot, we had to bail them out and no doubt banks still expect us to do so should the need be!

[Guest]

Re: Did you stop paying your debts in 2008/09/10 due to a claims ‘management’ firm ?

Sharon, to some extent you are missing the point here.

Indirectly, most of us stopped paying thanks to the claim management companies as they were the ones who made people aware of the relevant sections of CCA 1974.

I've never paid anything to those companies. At that time, my finances were still more or less ok.

Recession of 2008-13 hit me and many others hard. Entering a DMP or contacting Step Change etc. would have been silly.

By advising certain people not to pay - depending on circumstances etc. - you are not doing anything illegal or even morally questionable. Since when have banks had any morals?

Please remember, we all had to contribute to the RBS bailout. Their default was far worse than all non-paying UE defaulters put together. Why should we pay yet again?

Unlike RBS, we ordinary people don't have anyone to bail us out. Oh, I nearly forgot, we had to bail them out and no doubt banks still expect us to do so should the need be!

Unfortunately, many who stopped paying after given the impression that they were no longer legally liable, now find out that they unquestionably are, when A Stat demand lands on their mat.

The cause of action for the debtor in such a case against the CMC who issued this advice, would be failure of duty of care, the damages would be the additional charges and indeed the implications of the possible bankruptcy.