www.iva.co.uk

I see that the days of being able to try and legally get out of paying your debts have been dealt a blow:

http://www.debtwizard.com/index.php?opt ... &Itemid=61

And not before time!

I was a bit suspicious when they snuck it on on New years Eve

It confirms that banks can still enforce debts even if the original agreement has been lost or destroyed.
The ruling may affect thousands of potential cases gathered by claims management companies.
"It seems to me to be likely that the number of challenges... will diminish significantly hereafter," said Judge David Waksman. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8435867.stm

I'm extremely pleased it has happened.

One of my friends is always boasting about debt avoidance and today parking fine avoidance on her FB status updates, boy does it wind me up and I never comment although I want to but I don't want her to know my situation, this has pleased me immensely!

Good news!

I am glad to see that fairness has now been restored. Wonder what all the claims companies will find to keep them occupied about next!

I'm sure they'll already be looking round for something else!

I'm so tempted to post the link on my facebook status, as she'd know who she was as always bragging about debt avoidance but won't be so petty.....yet!

I think you will find it is not all as we think, reading between the lines if no agreement can be produced by the creditors or that the interest rate increased during the use, they will have to produce the agreement to ensure the agreement is enforceable.

If an agreement can be found, it does not have to have an original signature as stated in the Act.

However they can now report you to the credit agencies and if an agreement is found then they can actively retrieve the money (i.e. through the courts).

Obviously this will now dramatically reduce people going down this route as they would rather not have their credit file shoot to pieces.

I must say I would rather they changed the Act itself to close the loopholes rather than getting a Judge to disregard what is stated in an Act (As it does not set a good precedence for future issues that are genuine and unfair to the consumer like miss sold PPI etc)

It's a step in the right direction though!

Just because a debt cannot be enforced, it does not mean that it cannot be collected - and this means that the ongoing barrage of phone calls, letters and doorstep collectors could continue ad infinitum.

My advice is if it is due get it paid and if you cannot afford to do this take professional advice.

Sound advice Melanie as per usual x

Excellent Mel.

MelanieGiles wrote:

Just because a debt cannot be enforced, it does not mean that it cannot be collected - and this means that the ongoing barrage of phone calls, letters and doorstep collectors could continue ad infinitum.

My advice is if it is due get it paid and if you cannot afford to do this take professional advice.

I fully agree with your final comments of advice.

But just playing devils advocate here, only a certain amount of phone calls, letters etc would be allowed until it would be deemed as harassment under the harassment laws, so this would stop unless it went to court and it is back to square one again.

As I have mentioned, I feel a total review of the CCA is needed to sort this mess out and for these loop holes to be closed once and for all.