IQ Consultants, Felicitas Solutions, ECS Trustees - loan repayment demands

[pnr8uk]

anyone have any thoughts on the below:

FCA Consumer Credit sourcebook:

"A firm must not ignore or disregard a customer's claim that a debt has been settled or is disputed and must not continue to make demands for payment without providing clear justification and/or evidence as to why the customer's claim is not valid." 7.5.3

"A firm must suspend any steps it takes or its agent takes in the recovery of a debt from a customer where the customer disputes the debt on valid grounds or what may be valid grounds." 7.14.1

"Where a customer disputes a debt on valid grounds or what may be valid grounds, the firm must investigate the dispute and provide details of the debt to the customer in a timely manner." 7.14.3

Yes this is what I send to them (and others) everytime. This is the only company ever who have not followed those guidelines, some have taken time to respond and have sent letters inbetween (I suspect different departments at some of the bigger firms). Yet Gladstones are the first I have know to openly break the FCA guidelines.

ECT Tax and WTT will know this stuff better than I do for sure but if you read FCA guidelines, if they (Gladstones) break the rules we can sue them.

[webberg]

ECT Tax and WTT will know this stuff better than I do for sure but if you read FCA guidelines, if they (Gladstones) break the rules we can sue them.

Whilst action against Gladstones may be satisfying and even perhaps result in some financial compensation (heaven knows how long that will take for the very little you might get), that is NOT addressing the key issue.

Gladstones are messengers (with menaces perhaps, but still just working for somebody else).

The questions are:

1. Does the loan exist?
2. If so, who owns it?
3. Has its journey through various hands been conducted legally?

There are many others, but the above is a good start.

By all means frustrate the messenger and the process but don't let such busy work detract from dealing with the core of the issue.

[pnr8uk]

Whilst action against Gladstones may be satisfying and even perhaps result in some financial compensation (heaven knows how long that will take for the very little you might get), that is NOT addressing the key issue.

Gladstones are messengers (with menaces perhaps, but still just working for somebody else).

The questions are:

1. Does the loan exist?
2. If so, who owns it?
3. Has its journey through various hands been conducted legally?

There are many others, but the above is a good start.

By all means frustrate the messenger and the process but don't let such busy work detract from dealing with the core of the issue.

All very true for sure. What I am illustrating here is Gladstones who are the collectors of the debt and our first port of call have broken the FCA rules, this is all very clear, so technically we can sue them. This is all I am illustrating (we won't of course sue them) is they have to adhere very strictly to FCA rules.

You have forgotten the biggest one of all

4.) Provide a SIGNED original copy of the credit agreement.

All the best

[Confusedguy]

Letter contents?

I am new to this forum but have been reading the threads as I find myself in a predicament. I am looking to sign up to WTT and awaiting a response to my enquiry.

So received my second threatening letter from Gladstones and unfortunately I did open the link they send with so called evidence! Wish I hadn't. I am trying to follow Webberg's approach of being pragmatic rather than emotional...for my own sanity this is probably the best approach. I hope to hear from WTT soon as I need to consider the next step and response.

Even though my anxiety is high...no doubt a lot of us on here feel that way...I would like to think there is a way forward. At present the most important thing is keeping my family well and healthy under the current circumstances...so trying not to stress too much.

Keep strong everyone

Hi
If you dont mind can you please let us know if they really uploaded Assignors and Assignee's deed consent document as per their letter or are they just playing around. I haven't clicked the link at all for obvious reasons. Please let us all know so that we can be little bit more informed.
Appreciate your help.

Thanks

[webberg]

All very true for sure. What I am illustrating here is Gladstones who are the collectors of the debt and our first port of call have broken the FCA rules, this is all very clear, so technically we can sue them. This is all I am illustrating (we won't of course sue them) is they have to adhere very strictly to FCA rules.

You have forgotten the biggest one of all

4.) Provide a SIGNED original copy of the credit agreement.

All the best

Let's assume that the FCA for once in its existence moves at more than its usual glacial pace and in a few months says "Gladstones have failed to deliver the demands correctly, have ignored rules, have therefore invalidated the demands". The outcome? Likely to be a correction of those errors, new demands and yes, perhaps a cheque for each of you for a few quid.

So we have created some breathing space.

Attention should then turn to Felicitas. Do they have the required proof and can they produce it. From our experience so far, I would say that they are struggling. no proof = no debt = no demand.

However let's assume that they can eventually solve this administrative hurdle and that they do have a copy of the loan agreement that is enough to satisfy a Court (not sure it has to be original and with a wet signature but then I'm not a lawyer in this space).

The questions I posed remain valid. Everything else here creates delays and frustrations and who knows, perhaps forces Felicitas to give up their chase. Bear in mind the likely size of the prize here though. Even a write off fee at 5%/6% or above is a lot of zeros.

SO we say:

Get calm - the time for anger is over
Get detailed and ask questions - but be aware that most of these are delaying tactics
Get all your papers together - because we/others will need them to investigate provenance
Do not click through to any of the suggested websites - who knows what dangers lurk there
Get real - your options are:

1. Agree to pay for a write off
2. Agree to pay for a delay followed by a write off once the tax situation is final
3. Agree to pay for legal help to litigate the loan.

Likely costs?

1. No idea. I think sums of around 10% of loan value has been suggested? Don't pay that - negotiate. And remember that this is in addition to settling the tax due if you settle. (Don't write off if you have not settled)

2. No idea. Perhaps a fee plus the above percentage. negotiate. Tax as above.

Both of the above bring certainty that the loan is forever gone.

3. Research plus legal costs to the steps of Court perhaps £40k to £70k. If you go to Court, perhaps double that. Individually that is a big ask. In a group of people, less expensive. No guarantee of the loan not falling due of course.

[eek]

All very true for sure. What I am illustrating here is Gladstones who are the collectors of the debt and our first port of call have broken the FCA rules, this is all very clear, so technically we can sue them. This is all I am illustrating (we won't of course sue them) is they have to adhere very strictly to FCA rules.

You have forgotten the biggest one of all

4.) Provide a SIGNED original copy of the credit agreement.

All the best

You received the money and didn't send it back or query the payment so it's possible to argue that the loan was accepted. Do not count on a lack of paperwork being enough to protect you...

[pnr8uk]

You received the money and didn't send it back or query the payment so it's possible to argue that the loan was accepted. Do not count on a lack of paperwork being enough to protect you...

Very true of course. However, it is the number one clause in nearly all debt dispute case. It is possible of course to argue that same as it is possible to argue it where is the proof?

As I have said many times everyone must do what they see fit, I personally know dispute letters always work, one in delay, two in clarifying and three in assuring evidence and proof is in place.

From there on in the results differ.

Take care

[pnr8uk]

Let's assume that the FCA for once in its existence moves at more than its usual glacial pace and in a few months says "Gladstones have failed to deliver the demands correctly, have ignored rules, have therefore invalidated the demands". The outcome? Likely to be a correction of those errors, new demands and yes, perhaps a cheque for each of you for a few quid.

So we have created some breathing space.

Attention should then turn to Felicitas. Do they have the required proof and can they produce it. From our experience so far, I would say that they are struggling. no proof = no debt = no demand.

However let's assume that they can eventually solve this administrative hurdle and that they do have a copy of the loan agreement that is enough to satisfy a Court (not sure it has to be original and with a wet signature but then I'm not a lawyer in this space).

The questions I posed remain valid. Everything else here creates delays and frustrations and who knows, perhaps forces Felicitas to give up their chase. Bear in mind the likely size of the prize here though. Even a write off fee at 5%/6% or above is a lot of zeros.

SO we say:

Get calm - the time for anger is over
Get detailed and ask questions - but be aware that most of these are delaying tactics
Get all your papers together - because we/others will need them to investigate provenance
Do not click through to any of the suggested websites - who knows what dangers lurk there
Get real - your options are:

1. Agree to pay for a write off
2. Agree to pay for a delay followed by a write off once the tax situation is final
3. Agree to pay for legal help to litigate the loan.

Likely costs?

1. No idea. I think sums of around 10% of loan value has been suggested? Don't pay that - negotiate. And remember that this is in addition to settling the tax due if you settle. (Don't write off if you have not settled)

2. No idea. Perhaps a fee plus the above percentage. negotiate. Tax as above.

Both of the above bring certainty that the loan is forever gone.

3. Research plus legal costs to the steps of Court perhaps £40k to £70k. If you go to Court, perhaps double that. Individually that is a big ask. In a group of people, less expensive. No guarantee of the loan not falling due of course.

Agree with all you say and always have.

My take is dispute in a calm and collected and proven legal way. Never ignore these.

It normally goes the way you describe and eventually will come down to horse trading.

I still personally think this is nothing more than a 'shakedown'. I am leaving this now to the experts in the field such as yourself or ETC Tax to find out if Felictas have legal rights to even collect any debt.

Take care and thank you for all the work you are doing for us.

[neveragain]

Additionally, didn't someone say if the loan is written off, it may get IHT against it?

[BrilloPad]

Additionally, didn't someone say if the loan is written off, it may get IHT against it?

It has happened. Imagine being asked to pay 80% tax. I suppose its better than paying back 100% of the loan.