withdrawn full & final settlement

neverbefore2011

rosylips56 wrote: »

OK that's all I wanted to know. Like many people whose marriages break up after a long long time, they are not able to think straight and therefore make decisions that are not the best. People are able to claim back PPI which was mis-sold, yeah? Is it not forseeable that one day the FSA may stop debt collection companies making and withdrawing offers at random and wouldn't it be prudent for them to see evidence that the person can afford to repay and not getting themselves into an even worse financial situation? Just saying...... I did experience the most relentless harassment from many of the debt collection companies at the time so I really do not have any sympathy for 'the corporations' who bled me dry with all their charges and who intially tempted me with increased limits over and over. Most of them got their money back tenfold.

Seriously....it's going to cost me a fortune when I can afford to have my windows cleaned?!!!

What I meant to say was, there's no point in doing the spilt milk thing, just deal with the now

Do you have any ladders? I can just about afford a chamois leather and some vinegar...

rosylips56

Yeah I know what you are saying. I now have a clear credit history which is a bit of a miracle on my part but do have a few other problems now that I've reached the other end like a huge interest only mortgage via the only company that would take me on at the time. So despite moving on that whole situation with the full and final settlement with that particular debt doesn't sit well with me (and I did have 19 other debts) so I decided to throw it up for debate.

I got the ladders if you got the vinegar ......kitchen roll will do !!!

MusicalLawyer

They didn't withdraw it at random... they told you the offer was for a prescribed period of time only.

Why would the FSA stop debt collectors from offering F&F's to their debtors?
For some people, this is a god send.

I doubt they'd be able to do so anyway, as they offered an agreement, and it wasn't accepted - basic principled of Contract Law. The FSA can't change basic legal principles.

rosylips56

It's not the fact that they offer F&F settlements to their clients, that is, as you say, a godsend. It's the fact that its doubtful that they could produce any evidence as to the reason why it had to be for a minimal length of time only and why they cannot extend or re-offer it should someone genuinely be trying to raise the money. Just because someone is getting a minute of agreement sorted out in a separation case doesn't mean to say they are going to be flush. I'm afraid I don't have any legal training and we all know 'the law is an !!!'. Yes the offers are for a prescribed time but is two weeks really enough for anyone in a serious financial situation to raise funds to take advantage of a 'generous offer' - I certainly couldn't on many occasions even though I would have loved to. This particular case really hit hard as it was a very large sum and there was the offer dangling like a carrot ...and my remortgage wasn't coming through for another couple of weeks following expiry of the offer. I have been in a horrendously difficult financial situation ever since but debt free but one day in the near future the !!!! will hit the fan - I am nearing retiral and have a massive mortgage to pay off with no means of paying it.

neverbefore2011

The way I see it is this - a loan is a consumer product like any other - a car, a holiday, a new central heating system, whatever

If I book my summer holiday in January, and then in April I lose my job, I will not expect the holiday company to accept a 50% reduction in the price and allow me to go on holiday as planned. In the absence of any insurance cover, I will simply lose my deposit

The big difference between a loan and any other consumer product is that a loan is given to the customer before any payment at all has been made - imagine a holiday company allowing you to go on your holiday of a lifetime without any requirement for you to pay before you go!

Loan companies understand the market in which they operate, and they know that they will sometimes have to negotiate with their customers over repayment

But at the end of the day, like the holiday companies and the car dealers and the central heating installers, they are entitled to look for full payment for the products which they supply in good faith

timbstoke

From their point of view, it makes perfect sense:

"We can offer you a settlement figure of £7K"
"Oh great. I'm in the process of applying for a remortgage to clear all these debts, so as soon as that's through I'll be able to make that payment"
"Oh well if you're remortgaging anyway, you might as well pay the full £14K"

From where they're sitting, it's a perfectly reasonable thing to do. They're offering the settlement to try and get something rather than nothing from you. Once it becomes apparent that you'll soon be able to pay in full, why should they settle for less than that?

The moral is, NEVER let a creditor know how much you can afford to pay, or that you have imminent plans to pay in full, ESPECIALLY if it's a DCA. Had you told them that you'll need to speak with family to try and scrape the settlement figure together, it may well have remained valid until you'd done so.

Poosmate

Is this some kind of a wind up?

You stated that about 5 years ago you remortgaged and paid off a £14k debt and had another 19 creditors. The mortgage was interest only.

You then state in post 15:

"I have been in a horrendously difficult financial situation ever since but debt free but one day in the near future the !!!! will hit the fan - I am nearing retiral and have a massive mortgage to pay off with no means of paying it."

So you are debt free now? Did you pay off the other 19 creditors with the mortgage money?

If you've been paying off your debt slowly but surely over the last 5 years to the other 19 creditors you must have more spare money than 5 years ago.

The worst thing for you is that you haven't actually paid off the £14k debt, you only shifted it to your mortgage and as you are only paying interest you are still not paying it off.

I suppose the up side is that you had the benefit of that £14k but you'll never have to (or be able as you stated in post 15) pay it back.

Have you wondered or looked into what is going to happen when you retire? If you can no longer afford the interest only, will you lose your house? Do you have an endownment policy that is going to mature to pay off the capital? I thought youhad to with interest only mortgages.

Things for you to think about.

If you really are struggling you need to post your SOA to see if people can suggest ways of reducing your outgoings.

Use this link:

http://www.makesenseofcards.com/soacalc.html

Poo

MusicalLawyer

You could have asked them for a settlement figure when you got the re-mortgage money through, had you not told them about the remortgage.

The DCA doesn't need to give a reason why the F&F offer is for a prescribed time only, because they don't have to give you this offer at all. This agreement would take precedence over the original agreement. As you didn't accept it, you were still bound by the original agreement to pay the full balance not the account.

rosylips56

neverbefore2011 wrote: »

The way I see it is this - a loan is a consumer product like any other - a car, a holiday, a new central heating system, whatever

If I book my summer holiday in January, and then in April I lose my job, I will not expect the holiday company to accept a 50% reduction in the price and allow me to go on holiday as planned. In the absence of any insurance cover, I will simply lose my deposit

The big difference between a loan and any other consumer product is that a loan is given to the customer before any payment at all has been made - imagine a holiday company allowing you to go on your holiday of a lifetime without any requirement for you to pay before you go!

Loan companies understand the market in which they operate, and they know that they will sometimes have to negotiate with their customers over repayment

But at the end of the day, like the holiday companies and the car dealers and the central heating installers, they are entitled to look for full payment for the products which they supply in good faith

Thing is I didn't EXPECT them to offer a 50% reduction in the Loan. THEY offered me it out of the blue. Is it not like someone saying....I know you are struggling so what if we offer you the chance to pay us back only 50% in full and final settlement. I was more than grateful at the offer. However to have dangled such a carrot to someone in a desperate situation is cruel and heartless. They either can or cannot afford to make this concession - I feel the practice is quite unethical but I agree these offers are at the company's discretion.

rosylips56

KellyKing1987 wrote: »

You could have asked them for a settlement figure when you got the re-mortgage money through, had you not told them about the remortgage.

The DCA doesn't need to give a reason why the F&F offer is for a prescribed time only, because they don't have to give you this offer at all. This agreement would take precedence over the original agreement. As you didn't accept it, you were still bound by the original agreement to pay the full balance not the account.

If I remember correctly the mortgage company insisted on the larger debts being paid before the remaining funds became available to me to pay off the rest. During the time that the divorce lawyers were finished drawing everything out (as they do) I got the full & final settlement offer. I originally hoped that things would be sorted out in time to take advantage of it before it expired but they weren't. I probably did let them know I was remortgaging. I certainly wasn't thinking straight from 30 years of marriage with huge debts and an abusive relationship. In hindsight I should have been very careful with what information I gave them.