Lender has terminated my loan in error, where do I stand

magpiecottage

Conrad2 wrote: »

Yes, you have said that before. I'll go with my solicitors advice though if you don't mind.:)

In that case, I do not understand why you came on here asking us for an opinion if you were determined to go to a solicitor who agreed with you regardless. You are simply wasting everybody's time including your own.

Conrad2

magpiecottage wrote: »

In that case, I do not understand why you came on here asking us for an opinion if you were determined to go to a solicitor who agreed with you regardless. You are simply wasting everybody's time including your own.

I was asked for updates, and replied civilly. Read the thread, don't just sit there waiting to jump on me.

magpiecottage

Conrad2 wrote: »

I was asked for updates, and replied civilly. Read the thread, don't just sit there waiting to jump on me.

That does not change the fact that you seem determined to ignore everybody who has given you an answer other than the one you wanted to hear.

Conrad2

magpiecottage wrote

That does not change the fact that you seem determined to ignore everybody who has given you an answer other than the one you wanted to hear.

So, you think the advice given on here is infallible?

I have said over and again that I have had good advice on this thread.

However, JonesMU has just been repeating the same unsupported warnings of doom and gloom, and I have treated it for what it is. If you wish to support a wind up, have a think about how it reflects on you. He only expresses opinion and never a shred of reason and you are endorsing that.

If any lender unlawfully shreds someone's credit rating they will pay for it somehow provided the borrower pursues the matter - as I am doing. It would be wrong not to challenge assertions that the debtor can be made responsible for a lender's error, particularly on a forum that seeks to advise the consumer.

Repayment of the original debt is something else, and if they want a new agreement, they have come to me with an offer, which won't happen if they are still acting unlawfully. They would be in serious trouble if they got to court without ceasing their unlawful acts (which they have admitted to) or without showing that they had made a reasonable offer that I had refused. If my solicitor is correct though, they have no right to demand anything, as termination of the agreement was their voluntary act, in which I played no part other than to warn them that they were acting in error.

I understand what people are saying about me cancelling the DD, but it was done in reaction to the lender's termination. If there was any grey area about the termination, I would agree that this was sticky ground, but a collection notice from a third party is enough, and continued collection notices certainly prove it.

So who is going to be in trouble here. Most people on the forum agree that the bank were at least initially at fault, and that I will likely get some compo (it has already been offered). It is my reasons for pursuing the issue further which people are tending to question, and I can understand that as well. But with every day that the lender fails to sort out it's own mess, the less I am inclined to be forgiving. It is over two months since they made their error, and they still haven't put their unlawful act of reporting me as defaulting in Aug and Sept right, despite confirming to me that I didn't.

Regardless of anything that happened after, those reports should have been corrected as soon as they were aware of their error.

I have had good advice on this thread, though some have chosen to give it on PMs to avoid the chafe - their words not mine - and I do appreciate it and have acted upon it.

magpiecottage

Conrad2 wrote: »

So, you think the advice given on here is infallible?

No - I simply think the advice you have chosen to follow is.

However, JonesMU has just been repeating the same unsupported warnings of doom and gloom, and I have treated it for what it is. If you wish to support a wind up, have a think about how it reflects on you. He only expresses opinion and never a shred of reason and you are endorsing that.

I am simply telling you that I think your strategy is highly risky.

It would be wrong not to challenge assertions that the debtor can be made responsible for a lender's error

I agree - but the position of a court is that a consumer should act reasonably. It may not agree with your view that it is reasonable for a borrower to stop paying following an error by a lender. That is where your risk lies.

If my solicitor is correct though, they have no right to demand anything

That is a big "if", though and the lender probably has deeper pockets than you. In which case it can probably hire a better lawyer than you can - and get costs awarded against you.

If you insist on battling on, you may win - but you may also find they can still trash your credit record and that a court decides the redress you were offered was reasonable.

If so, then you could also find the court awarded costs against you.

Your decision so your risk.

Lou67

Wow, this is STILL going on? :eek:

magpiecottage

Lou67 wrote: »

Wow, this is STILL going on? :eek:

I suspect it will do until either he wins and comes back to gloat or he loses and disappears into the ether.

Apples2

magpiecottage wrote: »

I suspect it will do until either he wins and comes back to gloat or he loses and disappears into the ether.

I'm not convinced we will ever get a straight answer, the post will say he won no matter what actually happens.

Conrad2

magpiecottage wrote: »

I am simply telling you that I think your strategy is highly risky.
Your decision so your risk.

Hi MC,

Sorry, but these last few posts came about directly because you defended JonesMU's wind up post, it's all there above.

I appreciate what you say, and I accept that there is a risk, I have said that repeatedly, so you bringing it up again is a bit pointless as I am with you there.

However, I feel that the bank have behaved badly enough to take this further, and if that means I get more compo then great, and if they write off the debt, even better. But if I have to go back to making payments with a renegotiated agreement, because at the moment no agreement exists (due to the lenders action), then so be it. I would just like them to make an offer that reflects their unlawful acts, and am willing to accept legal advice that they may have no rights remaining at all, due to their actions.

If they hadn't made their mistake, I would still be paying off the debt as per the now non existent agreement, and if they had got back to me in the timescale they initially promised, all this could have been avoided. Their error took place in August, possibly even July, and I have only just started getting meaningful messages from them, which still do not recognise all of their improper actions.

So, despite the risk, I fancy I have a good chance of getting some justice here, as I can demonstrate to any court that I warned the lender of their error as soon as I could, and that the lender failed to act in a timely manner, and still have not undone their unlawful acts.

Forgive me if I challenge people when it is clearly implied that I am the party in the wrong.

Conrad2

magpiecottage wrote: »

I suspect it will do until either he wins and comes back to gloat or he loses and disappears into the ether.

I am not at all what you think I am.

I won't gloat, and I won't be in denial either.

I'll let you know either way, but I wouldn't hold your breath.