Media Nest Dept in Contention

[pigmnv]

Hi all

This is a first time post so please be gentle with responses I am a simple man trying to make my current situation better.
To cut a long story short after a divorce and everything which goes with that I found myself in not been able to repay my credit card debts of £54000. I have now been a step change DMP for a couple of years but at the level of debt will not be sorted until 2040 which I am not denying what I owe. I have recently been contacted by Media Nest saying potentially they can contend the debt under the CCA for a fixed fee. They are saying all/part of the debt could be written off this sounds all good to be true. I am completely green in this area and not even sure if this is possible ive not heard this before in the press and theres not much on the internet about this process.
Is it a scam?
Are there other companies that offer this service?

Any advice would be greatly received

pigmnv

[Debt Camel]

Re: Media Nest Dept in Contention

1) I have never heard od Media Nest and googling doesn't produce anything useful. This is not a company you should trust to be good at handling this sort of thing!

2) What they are referring to is asking each of your creditors to produce the Consumer Credit Act agreement for your account. If they can't, then the debt is unenforceable in a court and you can just stop paying it. This isn't a scam, it's your legal right, see this page from a large and well resp[ected debt charity explaining how it works: https://www.nationaldebtline.org/EW/...nt-advice.aspx.

As that link suggests, you can do all this yourself. No need to pay dodgy companies to do if for you. They will be writing exactly the same letter that you would.

What matters is when the credit card accounts were opened. For ones in the last few years, the chance of the CCA agreement not being able to be produced is very slim. If the account was opened before April 2007 then this is absolutely worth trying as the rules about the older accounts are stricter and harder for a creditor to comply with. For ones that aren't recent but aren't that old, it;s worth trying but don't get your hopes too high.

If most of your debts aren't old, then you need to be looking at other debt solutions. A form of insolvency probably.

You have a mountain of debt. Do you have any assets - a house with equity or a car?

[Amethyst]

Re: Media Nest Dept in Contention

" Media Nest " seem to be a new call centre set up in Chesterfield. Presumably they're going back into the cold calling vulnerable people business. Steer clear.

I'd certainly look into other debt solutions as Debt Camel has said. Sitting on a DMP till 2040 really doesn't seem the best option, are Stepchange running annual reviews with you?

[Diana M]

Re: Media Nest Dept in Contention

To cut a long story short after a divorce and everything which goes with that I found myself in not been able to repay my credit card debts of £54000. I have now been a step change DMP

. . . all/part of the debt could be written off this sounds all good to be true.

. . . . Are there other companies that offer this service?

There are other companies offering this service for a fee and I wouldn't touch any of them with a barge pole!

This forum has a free template letter which you can send to each of your creditors with a postal order for the £1 statutory fee. Here's the link > http://legalbeagles.info/forums/show...=7670#post7670

Since 2012 overdrafts which have been renewed on an annual basis are included under s.78 CCA.

If you're in a DMP chances are your credit file will already have been trashed with defaults. These 'vanish' (the whole file entry) after six years from when the default was added, so you will gradually begin to repair your credit image.

If any of your debts haven't been defaulted you need to be aware that if you stop paying then you will be vulnerable to a default on your CRA file.

There are several ways a debt can be 'unenforceable' in court not just non compliance with a CCA Request. Bad Default Notices and improper assignments to a debt purchaser are just two more. There are others.

I recently tested two ex-MBNA credit cards in court and even though the debt purchaser produced what they called credit agreements (documents) they were found to be 'irredeemably unenforceable' and the assignment wasn't proved either.

Cheer yourself up by reading this thread > http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...304#post723304

PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW – WIN

‘“RECONSTITUTED AGREEMENT – IRREDEEMABLY UNENFORCEABLE”
“UNREDACTED DEEDS OF ASSIGNMENT – NO ASSIGMENT PROVED”

So, held Recorder Bellamy in PRA Group (UK) Limited v Mayhew at Central London County Court on 22nd March 2017, at the end of a 3 day multi track trial, when dismissing PRA’s claim against our client.

Stale debts sued for on the back of 2 ‘reconstituted’ MBNA credit card agreements (May 1999 and October 2000) were held irredeemably unenforceable under CCA 1974. The evidence of an honest witness was preferred to that of so called “reconstituted agreements”.

After 3 days of close forensic examination of, and legal argument about, evidence and documents from both PRA and MBNA stating that our client’s specific debt had been assigned, the court held that no assignment had been proved.

Efforts, over many months, in earlier cases to force PRA into disclosure of un-redacted deeds and deep and sustained forensic challenge to the provenance of documents needed to prove regulatory compliance, finally drew back the veil. The reality behind bulk debt purchasing was revealed.

This decision shows that just saying an agreement is enforceable and producing a “reconstituted” copy does not prove that it is enforceable. Just saying an agreement has been assigned and producing a notice saying it has been assigned does not prove legal assignment.

Debt purchasers need to provide proof. If that means the pitifully few pence in the pound they pay for stale debts will increase because banks will now have to start keeping original evidence complying with regulatory consumer protection measures, it is hard to imagine many tears being shed, outside the City of London.

I have full knowledge of this case since I was the Defendant (Diana M is short for Diana Mayhew).

I was also the "Client" of Joanna Connolly Solicitors where I currently work. How ironical.

I have no shame in being taken to court for a debt which arose with MBNA when I was in "financial chaos" at the start of the Credit Crunch which was caused by the banks not me or any of you other debtors out there.

But I didn't personally owe PRA any money (as agreed by Recorder Bellamy) and that was the reason I decided to fight this case.

I wasn't only doing it for me, I was doing it for all the other debtors who've been served with claims for a MBNA debt which travelled the same assignment route as mine.

I was also doing it because the documents produced by the Claimant needed forensic examination. As Jo has said the court found them irredeemably unenforceable. There were two claims for two accounts and both credit agreements failed the test in court.

It was a win for the consumer not just me.

PRA have said that they will not be appealing the judgment.

Di (aka Diana Mayhew)

Di