Help and Advice Please

fermi

pratt596 wrote: »

I am not trying to avoid the debt - I owe it so must pay it - just want to be able to come to a monthly repayment arrangement with them. The person I spoke to just kept repeating that they had been instructed to collect the debt in full.

In addition to the post from NickX, many Debt Collection Agencies train there staff to ALWAYS ask for full payment on the first contact. They absolutely will not budge on the first call. The idea of that is to increase the psychological pressure on you. Don't let them do that to you.

Also remember that the phone agent will be up for a major bit of commission if they manage to squeeze large payments out of you early on, so they will push like anything for that reason as well.

All you can really do is the right thing, which is continue to make offers of payments that you can genuinely afford. And get some professional advice from CAB or the other organisations in my signature if you are concerned about any of the threats used.

Good luck.

relay

NickX wrote: »

Thanks for saying this CannyJock. There is something of a tendancy of certain posters on this board to be rather critical of people with debt problems which I have found rather unpleasant on occasion.

I have said it before and say it again, people from all walks of life can get into debt and it is not necessarily their own fault. I am sure that the majority of people who take out debts do so in good faith with every intention of paying them back. However, life is not fair, and events can conspire against you. Unemployment, illness, accident, relationship breakdowns can happen to the best of us, and sometimes it results in difficulty paying debts. IMHO people in this position need advice and support, not critiszm. The "you borrowed it, you should pay it back" brigade are simply not helpful.

To the OP, I do sympathize with your position. It is horrible of the Credit Card company to sell your debt to DCA when you were already on a payment plan. The people at the DCA are just bullies, they are the scourge of society in my opinion.

The main thing is to remember your rights and know their rights. They key thing is that you have a right not to be harrassed under any circumstances. Multiple telephone calls, visits from heavies, threats of bailiffs could all consitite harassment and if you feel that they are harassing you, then say that you only wish to communicate with them in writing and that if they do not comply with your requests then they are in danger of being reported for harassment.

The DCA does not have any right to enter your property or take your belongings. Only bailiffs appointed by the court can do this. The DCA will need to take you to court for repayment, however provided you have made an effort to make some repayments and behaved reasonably, then the court is very unlikely to send bailiffs to you.

The CAB (Citizens Advice Bureau) will be able to advise you in more detail, but I would recommend that you say to them that you will continue to make the payments that you have been previously, but you simply cannot afford to pay any more. This is very reasonable, and any court is unlikely to go against you.

They can huff and puff all they like, and please don't get upset about this, but they are just using bully boy tactics to try and get paid. If they really do upset you, then you are within your rights to report them. Certainly do not permit visits or any form of entry into your property.

Do go to CAB, they are very experienced in these matters, and have access to professional legal advice if necessary.

Finally Good Luck and keep us posted.

I really think my question has been taken completely out of context & i apologise if i am wrong but the first paragraph of your post seems in reply to my question so let me stress now that i am not being cynical , not criticizing, and i am not a member of the "You borrowed it so you can pay it back" brigade (and you call other people cynical??) , i am just asking a simple question because i am curious & don't understand how it works but, nobody seems able to answer it without assuming it as being critical, cynical or Unhelpful.

Why would the DCA be expected to honour an agreement they didn't make?

What's so cynical & critical about asking that?? Are we just not allowed to ask simple questions about debts without being reprimanded for being unhelpful by the 'Holier than thou' brigade?

CannyJock

There's no agreement with the DCA.

They will try and define a new agreement where the debt it repaid in full, immediately on threat of severe consequences. The debtor will be unduly put under pressure to accept this as their only option, which it isn't.

The OP had an agreement with the CCC that the CCC seem to have broken and sold the debt on.

There's a procedure for the OP to follow to request a signed copy of the credit agreement from the DCA, that has to be provided within 14 days. Now that the debt has been sold on, it seems to be pointless to go back to the CCC. The goal posts have moved and they're playing a different game completely. There are other threads that go into this process in much more detail than I can remember but they explain basically how to fight back against the bully boy tactics that the DCA use.

If the DCA are unable to comply with the procedure specified by the consumer credit agreement then the debt is "unrecoverable". The aim of knowing the rules on this is to fight back and come out the other end with an agreement that is suitable to both side.

To answer the question though, the DCA have inherited the debt and by implication should have inherited the agreement. Legally they didn't of course and it's still not clear why the CCC sold the debt on in the first place if it was being repaid albeit over a period of time.

I don't think anybody is having a go at individual posters here, just trying to make sure that the OP is made aware that if the CCC has broken an agreement then that doesn't mean that the DCA have them over a barrel and can dictate new terms - there is a procedure to follow and you need to be armed with the information to fight your corner.

doire_2

relay wrote: »

I really think my question has been taken completely out of context & i apologise if i am wrong but the first paragraph of your post seems in reply to my question so let me stress now that i am not being cynical , not criticizing, and i am not a member of the "You borrowed it so you can pay it back" brigade (and you call other people cynical??) , i am just asking a simple question because i am curious & don't understand how it works but, nobody seems able to answer it without assuming it as being critical, cynical or Unhelpful.

Why would the DCA be expected to honour an agreement they didn't make?

What's so cynical & critical about asking that?? Are we just not allowed to ask simple questions about debts without being reprimanded for being unhelpful by the 'Holier than thou' brigade?

Look you are not helping the OP with your posts so why not just drop it?

NickX

relay wrote: »

Why would the DCA be expected to honour an agreement they didn't make?

What's so cynical & critical about asking that?? Are we just not allowed to ask simple questions about debts without being reprimanded for being unhelpful by the 'Holier than thou' brigade?

Right, my comment about "you borrowed it, you pay it back" brigade was referring to a general impression that I have got from several posters and some rather heated exchanges that have occurred on other threads, I was not directing this at you personally.

The answer to your question about honouring the agreement is not known without examining the documentation in detail which hopefully CAB can do for the OP. As CannyJock has pointed out, on the surface it appears that the Credit Card Company have broken the agreement, but it is impossible to comment without seeing all the background.

For the record, I have not said anyone is cynical, although I know I can be cynical at times and perhaps it is not always helpful.

I hope this clarifies my previous post.