To contact or not to contact that is the question

winner12

Hi all
Have been asked to start a new thread with this one
I have been on a DMP for 6 months 1 of my creditors has refused to accept my pro rata offers having complained to them they have sent a letter to say they will no longer correspond with me and will file any future letters my question what happens now at what stage will they take me to court and can they refuse to correspond even though I have taken advice through a debt charity

Hannah_10

When you say a creditor, who? Is it a bank? A DCA?

winner12

Hi Hannah
Its a CC company Monument

cobblers_boy

Hi W12

Monument is now part of Barclaycard I believe and has been for some time. I had issues with them about 2 - 3 years ago and they agreed to freeze all interest in return for me paying 1% of the balance each month until cleared. I know that makes it 100 months to pay off but hoping that when some of the more expensive debts are cleared I will move onto this and clear it quicker.

Not sure if that helps but hope you get everyting sorted soon.

Good luck

CB:)

winner12

Hi Cobblers Boy
Its not part of Barclays anymore its Rapheal now and part of Compucredit but I have complained on all fronts but to no avail

cobblers_boy

Hi W12

Apologies I could not be of more help. I hope you get somehwere soon. From reading other threads persistence appears to be the key. Keep writing to them and offering the amount you can afford and which is proportionately in line with what you are paying others.

Keep copies of everything and do not talk to them on the phone.

Hopefully somebody else with greater knowledge than me will be along shortly to give some concrete advice/

CB:)

Hannah_10

Thanks.

They don't have to reply, and technically they could take you to court straight away.

Did you know that technically, a police officer must give a pregnant lady his helmet to wee in and his cloak to shield herself if he is asked?

Or that technically you can still be hung if you steal a sheep?

Getting back to how things really work, people who steal sheep get done for theft and pregnant ladies have a marked preference for proper bogs! Also back in the real world, the CC co. will refuse int he hope they can extract more money from you than you actually have. It's not such a long shot as you'd think because people are very frightened of the courts (even when they needn't be) so they can quite often persuade a debtor to cut the kids food back and stop replacing thier worn out pants and live in wretchedness and misery far beyond anything that is fair. This is what they want to do to you. They clearly couldn't give a sh*t that you need to pay the rent or you will be homeless. They think they should be above all that triviality of you being allowed to actually survive and that you should give thier fatcat shareholders more more more. Doesn't it just make your heart glow with warmth? Scumbags.

And where are you going to get these higher payments? Are you going to starve yourself? Seriously? They can't have what you haven't got can they. Oh yeah sure you could agree to pay more than you've got, and then where does that leave you? Fine... till about the middle of next month when you'll have to put the heating on. Or till you run out of food. This mate, is a serious case of "no deal".

There's always gonna be one who rejects the DMP, like the greedy b*st*rds they are. So self-entitled. I have seen some real suffering because of creditors like these. You need to treat it with the comtempt it deserves and the contemmpt with which any court will treat it.

And that is the paradox, because we all fear the court but the court isn't going to award any more to a creditor than your DMP says you can pay. So they say "we'll take you to court" not because they are going to, they know as well as I do that they'd be worse off doing so, but because it might just mean you'll capitulate and cause yourself suffering. It's not like you'd even be suffering for a good reason, no one's relying on this cash to survive (just you), they want it for pure profit alone.

What will realistically happen next is you send back the same SOA and the same letter, just with another sentance saying "further to your letter of (date) I can again confirm the amount I am able to offer you is £xx, see enclosed SOA". What you're saying to them, between the lines is, bog off, you'll get what I've got, I can't just pluck cash out of the air, so take it or leave it. They will get bored of this at some point, default you and pass you to a DCA, who will either accept the DMP or you will get into the same "further to your letter of..." routine. Eventually the penny will drop somewhere that as much as they hate it, you're nobodys doormat, nor are you a pickpocket or a magician. If you haven't got it, they can't have it. Simples.

So in short, hold your ground, they know they're being t*ssers. You need not fear the courts, the judge is not gonna award them over or above what you have.

winner12

Thanks for your help
I do read some horror stories on here about been taken to court even though DMP are in place and the payments are upto date as per pro rata offers but if they wont comunicate anymore and its their final response do I go to the FO for help or because its a mutual agreement to reduce a payment will they not investigate

Hannah_10

You stop expecting them to reply at talk at them, not to them. So next month you pop a cheque or postal order in the post, with the same old letter, and the same old SOA and except the bit where you say "further to your letter of" you carry on just as bloody mindedly as they are. One of you has to give up first, you have the power to decide "it wont be me".

If they cash those cheques (and if you send them recorded there is more or less no chance they will be able to resist) then they have accepted in the eyes of the court and you can really laugh at the threat-o-gram letters then, because even they know they've got no case at that point.

winner12

Hi Hannah
Your replys are great and to the point so is it better to send a cheque or pay over the counter and bombard them with SOA as you advise

Hannah_10

Thanks, always nice to know when I'm being helpful

I would resend the SOA because it's a kind of monotonous way of saying "yeah yeah, said it all before".

It's also a clear sign that you can't be manipulated, you can't be ground down and you are plain not playing thier stupid games. It means for the person at the DCA sitting there looking at the case history thinking "how can we screw him for more" the answer that leaps out after a while will be "there's no point trying, this one doesn't reposnd to anything, they'll just send the SOA a-bloody-gain *sigh*"

The SOA is the only answer there is, it is a document very clearly saying "I can afford not a penny more".

I know it's a pain in the rear showing the same old pass, every day, I used to have to show a staff pass to get into work, I forgot it one day and said to the doorman "oh come off it, you know me by now surely", to which he said "how do I know you weren't fired yesterday"? He had a fair point.

So also in resending the SOA you are effectively saying "nothing changed yesterday, you are still getting £xx".

They hate it.

If you don't write anything back they will manage to find a way to get you bite again, they keep all the most upsetting letters on file you know. If you're sending them nothing they will pester you more rather than less. But sending the same thing, over and over, proving that none of their letters have any effect... Now that's like a little stone wall they can't penetrate.

They will only stick so much of that and then they'll give up and pass it to a DCA, who will send the same types of threats. So you send them the SOA a-bloody-gain as well.

One of two things is the net result here. They will either cave in acceptance that you are a true stonefaced b*stard who is not not prepared to be starved or go naked, or even shiver a bit in winter.... Or they will go to court, and that will be excellent because...

If they were cashing the cheques then the judge will see that as an acceptance of your DMP. (Yeah, really, good isn't it).
The judge will at best, award them in line with your SOA, exactly as you have been doing, or EVEN LESS (the judge might actually up some of your living expenses).
The judge is highly unlikely to award thier costs on top of this because you have a valid defence against that. Your defence is that awarding costs will make your hardship greater and the total duration of the debt longer- it is a defence with a good success rate.
That is the best case scenario, the worst case for them is that the judge looks at what you have been saying to them all along (your SOA), that you have been paying regularly (and you will have been) and decides that they are being vexatious (this is legalese for being sh*t-stirrers) and says there is no case to answer. This leaves them with a 3-figure bill for costs.

So in all, you can't lose this one unless you bite the bait and start trying to reason with them. Which is why I'm saying- don't. You want a skin thicker than Rhino hide and a very high tolerance for repeating yourself.

Goes against instinct doesn't it, that's why creditors send the threats they do! There is not a damn thing they can do to get extra money when there is a sensible SOA and a rhino-hide debtor. They are dearly hoping you aren't one.