CCA request and CCCS...

Maharishi

Posted an update on my old thread yesterday but it got swiftly buried with no replies, so rather than bump it I thought I'd use this thread as an addendum for now.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3015846

Cliff notes;
On DMP 4 years with CCCS
CapQuest started charging interest so going to CCA them back in Feb

Update...

Haven't sent the CCA request as yet due to a variety of reasons but finally got around to doing it this week, however here's what transpired;

Emailed and phoned the CCCS to ask them to take CQ off of my DMP plan as I was intending to put the account into dispute. The (very nice) lady said, 'Sorry but we cannot do that'. 'It has to be all your creditors or none', in which case I'd be on my own again. This probably has its downsides, especially doing your own financial statement of affairs which they wouldn't accept before I joined the CCCS DMP plan.

She advised speaking to the Financial Ombudsman and getting them involved. As it was a freephone number, I thought; why not? Told the lady (again, very nice) there the story whereupon she took a few pertinent details and said that she will be writing to CQ today and that they will have 6 weeks to sort this interest business out.

To be frank I was pretty surprised at getting such immediate assistance and I'll be curious to see what transpires from it.

Can anyone offer some advice on the CCCS business though? Is it prudent to cut ties with them and go it alone when pursuing a CCA request? I can see their standpoint that they have to treat all creditors equal (even the !!!!!!!s), but she stressed that there was no way that I could stop paying and still be shepherded by them. Also, she was quite concerned that they would 'take further action' if I stopped paying. I said at nearly 55 my credit rating was not going to be a long term problem...

I am definitely at a loss what to do now.

Thanks in advance - as always,

Hannah_10

Your 2 choices here can be summerised as Play Nicely or Ball Busting

Play Nicely can work. The FOS are going to have a word with CQ and perhaps the interest will be undone/removed. That would be simple. That would still leave you paying off your DMP wit the CCCS. The pro's are that you have a less complicated life, a predictable debt-free date and all the time you are paying it off your defaults slip further back in your credit file until at 6 years old they will finally fall off it altogether (5 years in Scotland). The cons are you might pay more than you have to.

Ball Busting can also work. That would entail you pulling out of your DMP and challenging the validity of the debt to CQ by using the officially recognised method (CCA request). Actually why stop at CQ, are your other 2 debts challengeable as well? The pro's are that you may end up paying a lot less. The cons are that there are no guarantees you will succeed, you can expect the aggro level to rise, there may be threatograms, calls and visitors to see off and you will end up licking a lot of stamps. Potentially you could end up with a CCJ, but not if you have sent the CCA request by recorded post and remembered not to sign it (same advice as your other thread).

There is no right answer. It's a choice. Do you want to be nice and accepting and get it over with or tough and challenging and perhaps lower your overall burden? I think we can all be either in different circumstances.

Maharishi

Hannah_10 wrote: »

Your 2 choices here can be summerised as Play Nicely or Ball Busting

Play Nicely can work. The FOS are going to have a word with CQ and perhaps the interest will be undone/removed. That would be simple. That would still leave you paying off your DMP wit the CCCS. The pro's are that you have a less complicated life, a predictable debt-free date and all the time you are paying it off your defaults slip further back in your credit file until at 6 years old they will finally fall off it altogether (5 years in Scotland). The cons are you might pay more than you have to.

Ball Busting can also work. That would entail you pulling out of your DMP and challenging the validity of the debt to CQ by using the officially recognised method (CCA request). Actually why stop at CQ, are your other 2 debts challengeable as well? The pro's are that you may end up paying a lot less. The cons are that there are no guarantees you will succeed, you can expect the aggro level to rise, there may be threatograms, calls and visitors to see off and you will end up licking a lot of stamps. Potentially you could end up with a CCJ, but not if you have sent the CCA request by recorded post and remembered not to sign it (same advice as your other thread).

There is no right answer. It's a choice. Do you want to be nice and accepting and get it over with or tough and challenging and perhaps lower your overall burden? I think we can all be either in different circumstances.

Thanks Hannah. That is a great reply and highlights the mental dilemma I am in.

With regard to the other creditors, 2 debts are both with 1st Credit and relate to Citi Card and Aqua Card and the other is directly with Mint Card whom, it seems, don't sell them on or take reduced settlement offers either! (according to the guy I spoke to recently on the telephone). Whether I could CCA the two 1st credit debts, the answer is I don't know. Chances are the paperwork will be lax or lost. I would need to scrutinise what I have this end, (and I keep everything), and make a judgement call on this.

My real problem is the extra nonsense that will occur with the others if I leave CCCS' care. The debt in question represents approx 4k out of a total of 11k, and so it is the lion's share by far.

The defaults on my credit file are really of no concern whatsoever. I was being truthful when I said that at nearly 55 credit was not going to be a criteria in my remaining years, however many or few.

I have never been in such turmoil as I am now. In all my years I have always been able to make a call one way or another, but this leaves me right on the fence. If I get enough replies I may just take the majority-vote route.

Kindest to you all,

M

Hannah_10

So lets say you spent a year treating challenging the debts as a bit of a part-time job. Judging by reading your other thread you learn fast, you would do a thorough job. Perhaps you would be devoting a couple of hours a week to it (I can't see it taking more than that) on an as-needed basis. Lets say it took 2 years to come to a conclusion. That'd be 200 hours of work. At the minimum wage your time is worth about £1200 for that task. Lets say you succeeded with CQ, your time would then have been worth £20 an hour. If you succeeded with all three of them your time would have been worth £55 an hour. If you lose then you have invested your time, maybe £1-5 a month in postage and photocopying fees. If you can take your feelings out of it then I'd say on a cold, logical level it was a good risk, very good, fantastic in fact. People aren't robotic though, only you know if you can set feelings aside.

With regard to what Mint said on the phone, it was on the phone. That is in itself cause for scepticism. See The Golden Rule.

Maharishi

That 'Golden Rule' link was a very good read. Stirred up the grey matter somewhat.

If I did CCA the other 1st credit debts, and they produced something, what on the CCA are we looking for that makes it legal and enforceable? What I mean to ask is; Is there one particular sentence that everything tends to hinge on? Hope that makes sense.

M

nottoolate

failing to comply with a cca wouldn't mean that the debt wasn't still owed, so i can see cccs viewpoint there. plus you don't even know yet whether they can produce one.

you might get the debt reduced if interest is taken off but again you are not disputing the entire debt. if the entire amount was in dispute then taking it off the dmp while it is sorted might be possible.

Hannah_10

Joining all-about-debt is a good idea, they are really clued up on unenforcibility.

nottoolate

Maharishi wrote: »

If I did CCA the other 1st credit debts, and they produced something, what on the CCA are we looking for that makes it legal and enforceable? What I mean to ask is; Is there one particular sentence that everything tends to hinge on? Hope that makes sense

not one sentence

assuming the agreements were taken out before april 2007 then

for a credit card there would need to be your signature, a credit limit or an explanation of how it will be determined, the interest rate to be applied, and details of how the amount and timing of repayments are to be made

for a fixed sum loan it would be your signature, the amount of credit and details of repayments (how much and on what schedule)

the regulations go into more detail on each point but that is basically it

an agreement that is missing any of the above would not be enforceable by a court

barbiedoll

Surely you could just CCA the debt whilst still paying through CCCS? I know the thought of paying Crapquest whilst the debt is officially in dispute will stick in your throat but remember, they have 14 days to comply with the request so with a bit of luck, you may only have to pay one or two months before you can (hopefully) get rid of the debt. And if the debt is in the hands of CQ anyway, you will already be defaulted on your credit file, they can't default you again!

I would send the CCA letter anyway and keep on with CCCS for now. As Hannah says, by playing "nice", you will still have CCCS doing the legwork and if there is any way that the debt can be got rid of, you can let CCCS know that you'll be going it alone from then on.

And maybe you could start a new DMP with, say, Payplan?

Do let us know what you decide. And good luck!

Maharishi

nottoolate wrote: »

failing to comply with a cca wouldn't mean that the debt wasn't still owed, so i can see cccs viewpoint there. plus you don't even know yet whether they can produce one.

you might get the debt reduced if interest is taken off but again you are not disputing the entire debt. if the entire amount was in dispute then taking it off the dmp while it is sorted might be possible.

No, that's correct. I am at pains to get the (approx) £250 interest removed as the reason CQ are 'applying' it is completely untrue. They are claiming a late or missed payment back in March 2010 but the CCCS record of payments to CQ, on my behalf, show this to be false.

Maharishi

nottoolate wrote: »

not one sentence

assuming the agreements were taken out before april 2007 then

for a credit card there would need to be your signature, a credit limit or an explanation of how it will be determined, the interest rate to be applied, and details of how the amount and timing of repayments are to be made

for a fixed sum loan it would be your signature, the amount of credit and details of repayments (how much and on what schedule)

the regulations go into more detail on each point but that is basically it

an agreement that is missing any of the above would not be enforceable by a court

All 4 debts are CC and were all taken out around 2004/05. The accounts all defaulted in 2007 when my income dropped.

Having just searched through the relevant paperwork, I am dismayed to find that I must have had a clearout some time ago and shredded the original paperwork, along with the statements for the first 2 years.

Would have had a clearer idea of what was originally issued if I had not done that.

M