Very Very interesting (if you have any debts...)

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

****Firstly I would like to appologise about the length of this thread. If you have no interest in saving money, or do not have any debts (mortgage excluded) or are not interested in financial news, then this thread probably wont interest you****

 

I used to work for a mortgage broker, but when the market changed due to the big bad captain credit crunch I decided it was best to leave. I met up with a few of the lads I used to work with last Friday as it was one of their stag do's and got chatting to them about how the company was.

 

They advised me they are venturing into a new 'product' which has been brought to their attention by a debt management company.

 

I do not know the validity of the information I was given, and to be honest, when I heard it, I thought it sounded too good to be true. However, a quick google search earlier today revealed a few interesting articles which seem to back up what was said in some way.

 

Anyway..

 

This will fly over a lot of peoples heads but ill try to keep it as non-financially-complicated as possible as this may well be of use to people.

 

In April 2007 new Consumer Credit laws came into place which made it easier for us mere mortals to challenge credit agreements. This new law putting it simply means that any credit agreement signed before April 2007 stood a good chance of being (when challenged in a court of law) deemed unenforceable thus rendering the amount you owe as nothing - wiping the debt out if you will.

 

I was told this is due to the calculation of the APR's. A lot of people quote APR's when talking about the interest rates of loans and credit cards but not a lot of people know that APR's are a 'rough' average. For example, if Mr Joe Smith takes a loan out with no set up costs or ending fee's, pays all payments on time and never requests an extra statement or queries anything, the actual APR will be fairly similar to the interest rate charged. However, if Mr Jim Jones takes out the same loan but misses payments from time to time resulting in late payment/missed payment fee's and he request a few statements throughout the course of the loan (which are also charged seperately) then the charges associated with his loan are higher than those of Joe Smiths. Consequently his APR is higher. Now when you apply for the loan, there is no knowing if you will be like Joe Smith and not incur additional charges or if you will be like Jim Jones and incur a lot of extra charges so finance companies have been quoting APR's which they have calculated by using averages.

 

Apparently, if you signed a credit agreement before April 2007 which quotes an APR, there is a good chance the wording on the credit agreement is incorrect. If challenged in a court, there is a chance the judge will agree and the debt cannot be recalled. Esentially you would wipe your slate clean and the debt is written off. This would also not have any bearing on your credit file. A few of these cases have gone through, mainly being a tactic employed by the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) to help people who cannot afford their outgoings, however a few firms are now employing legal bod's to take cases on which they can charge a fee for.

 

The company I used to work for are trialling this to see if it works with one of their employees. Her has a personal loan which he took out about 5 years ago with a remaining balance of about £10k. They are changing an initial £450 for the case to be looked at. This would cover one credit agreement with an additional £150 per credit agreement after this (so for 4 loans it would be £900 irrespective of the amount owing) If the legal peep's believe it has legs then they will take the case on for you. If they do not think it has legs, they will refund £400 of the £450 (the £50 they use being to write 2 letters, one for the creditor to provide the info they need and a copy for you). If your case is successful, they will charge you £1000 upon settlement of the debt.

 

This means if it works for this person they are trialling it with, he could kiss goodbye to £10k of debt with just £1450.

 

Below are a few links to the information I have seen including a report some 16 months ago from Martin Lewis.

 

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=420019 - very interesting comment (one of the last ones) which quotes the bloke who wrote the CCA 1974.

 

http://www.financialagreementsolutions.co.uk/index.html

 

I am fully aware of the morals of this, should it turn out to be something which is possible. I for one pay everything on time. I had a few credit cards which I kept a balance on when I was younger and learnt from this lesson. They are all paid up now and I chose not to take credit out so would be a tad miffed if Tom, **** and Harry got all their debt cleared just because they decided to credit whore themselves around. But more importantly, if this became common knowledge and everyone started to do it, the UK banking system and consequently economy would fall into the biggest darkest pit ever!

 

I believe that this hasnt been as widely publisised for this reason, along with a lot of people who wont give it a try for fear of being turned over by their bank. I was also told that *alledgedly* banks and building soceities have known about this for some time and have been stock piling cash to cover the claims, but I am unsure of the validity of this.

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

Furthermore, a point I would be interested to know if it does work would be in light of credit cards which were taken out before April 2007 and fall into the incorrect agreement. If I were to go out and spunk the cards to the limit now, would I be able to claim under this loop hole to the law the next day?

[ozzmeister]

Sounds interetsing im guessing it wouldnt work for student loans though?

[stevegrant]

To be honest, anyone who tries to get out of a credit agreement on something as ridiculous as that is a **** and should have the interest rate instantly doubled, IMO.

 

When you take out a loan, you are provided with the interest rate and an illustration of what the total payments over the course of the loan will be assuming you keep up with the repayments. The contract will also state penalty fees for late payments or defaults and also whether interest will be applied to those payments as well (and the rate, if different).

 

When you sign the contract, you sign it to state that you have read the contract and agree to every single clause that is written in it.

[Saint Mikey]

Sounds interetsing im guessing it wouldnt work for student loans though?

 

LOL. If it did, Higher Education in this country would collapse.

[mack rill]

:confused: ****firstly........then it leveled out at 36000..Feet:confused:

[nexus icon]

Am I the only one getting fed up with the "claim back" culture that has arisen recently?

[CabbageFace]

Am I the only one getting fed up with the "claim back" culture that has arisen recently?

 

Bank charges fair enough, but this seems abit extreme.

[Guest Dark Sotonic Mills]

Bank charges fair enough, but this seems abit extreme.

 

As one comment on the MoneySaving forum said; these finance companies are charging you interest on these loans and have a duty and the resources to get it right. If they can't make sure that their contracts adhere to a 34 year old act then it's their look out.

[CabbageFace]

As one comment on the MoneySaving forum said; these finance companies are charging you interest on these loans and have a duty and the resources to get it right. If they can't make sure that their contracts adhere to a 34 year old act then it's their look out.

 

True, fook it im going to phone them up and see what happens. lol.

[sotonjoe]

It made sense until you said...

 

I was told this is due to the calculation of the APR's. A lot of people quote APR's when talking about the interest rates of loans and credit cards but not a lot of people know that APR's are a 'rough' average. For example, if Mr Joe Smith takes a loan out with no set up costs or ending fee's, pays all payments on time and never requests an extra statement or queries anything, the actual APR will be fairly similar to the interest rate charged. However, if Mr Jim Jones takes out the same loan but misses payments from time to time resulting in late payment/missed payment fee's and he request a few statements throughout the course of the loan (which are also charged seperately) then the charges associated with his loan are higher than those of Joe Smiths. Consequently his APR is higher. Now when you apply for the loan, there is no knowing if you will be like Joe Smith and not incur additional charges or if you will be like Jim Jones and incur a lot of extra charges so finance companies have been quoting APR's which they have calculated by using averages.

 

The instances you mentioned, including late payments etc, don't effect the apr at all. Rather, they will alter the balance the apr is applied to and that's how you will end up paying more. As Steve said, the schedule of charges will have been clearly set out in the loan agreement so there's nothing to be challenging unless you're paying charges that weren't set out.

 

People should be facing up to debt not trying to get round it ... somebody has to foot the bill somewhere along the line.

[No 2 to Maybush]

It made sense until you said...

 

 

 

The instances you mentioned, including late payments etc, don't effect the apr at all. Rather, they will alter the balance the apr is applied to and that's how you will end up paying more. As Steve said, the schedule of charges will have been clearly set out in the loan agreement so there's nothing to be challenging unless you're paying charges that weren't set out.

 

People should be facing up to debt not trying to get round it ... somebody has to foot the bill somewhere along the line.

 

I would have agreed with your statement up until 2 months ago when I started looking into the banking system. Where do you think the "money" they "loan" you comes form? The banks create it out of thin air based on your signature. They take your loan agreement that you signed and brand it an "asset" on their books. Say the loan was for 20K. Using the agreement with your signature on it as an asset, they are therefore allowed to lend a further 180k against the asset. Its called FIAT banking. So in this scenario you have sold your signature to the bank for 20k, whereas in fact it is worth 200k to the bank as it has allowed them to create money to make further loans to AN Other. ANd with each new loan they make, the scenario is repeated. This is one facet of the credit crunch that gets hidden by the statement "overleveraged". The banks have been doing this for years and are all seriously overleveraged.

 

So I have come to the conclusion that we, the people, owe the banks NOTHING. They have used the money they have created against your signature to enrich themselves for many, many years. If you can get out of a loan agreement because they have messed up the wording on the agreement, then it's tough on them.

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

Sounds interetsing im guessing it wouldnt work for student loans though?

 

Apparently it does!

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

It made sense until you said...

 

The instances you mentioned, including late payments etc, don't effect the apr at all. Rather, they will alter the balance the apr is applied to and that's how you will end up paying more. As Steve said, the schedule of charges will have been clearly set out in the loan agreement so there's nothing to be challenging unless you're paying charges that weren't set out.

 

People should be facing up to debt not trying to get round it ... somebody has to foot the bill somewhere along the line.

 

I think you mean interest rate is applied to?

 

The point of this loop hole is that if I lent you £10 and told you the APR is 5% and then you incur additional fee's which bump the APR up, the original agreement which you signed stating you would pay 5% APR is inaccurate.

 

Yes the T&C's can advise you of the different fee's but it doesnt go onto say 'this will change the APR from x to y' as its impossible to forsee what will happen in the future.

[benjii]

Clearly no court is going to pass a judgment which renders the majority of existing personal debt agreements unenforceable or void.

Edited 6 August, 2008 by benjii

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

Clearly no court is going to pass a judgment which renders the majority of existing personal debt agreements unenforceable or void.

 

Clearly courts already have. Its just to what extent that they say enough is enough.

 

A single widower mother who is struggling to get by and uses this to her advantage to get a decent way of life yes, I think its ok.

 

Someone trying to do it to get a cheap buck here or there, well thats a different matter.

 

The whole point of the htread was pointing out this loop hole which companies and legal bodies are jumping all over so I think there is something in it.

[benjii]

Clearly courts already have. Its just to what extent that they say enough is enough.

 

A single widower mother who is struggling to get by and uses this to her advantage to get a decent way of life yes, I think its ok.

 

Someone trying to do it to get a cheap buck here or there, well thats a different matter.

 

The whole point of the htread was pointing out this loop hole which companies and legal bodies are jumping all over so I think there is something in it.

 

They may have passed a judgment in a specific case or two saying that a given agreement was invalid or unenforceable. For obvious public policy reasons, which you yourself earlier alluded to, they are quite clearly not going to deliver a judgment which states that all standard form loans created before April 2007 are void or unenforceable, if there are a significant amount of such loans such as would cause a complete **** up in the banking system (which one would expect there are).

 

By all means, take your bank to court if you think it's a good idea though!

 

Sounds to me like someone's thinking of launching a cheap, nasty, opportunistic legal product; that's all.

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

Sounds to me like someone's thinking of launching a cheap, nasty, opportunistic legal product; that's all.

 

Which is basically what I was saying but if it works then it works. Im not saying all loans before April 2007 are eligible either. Im not sure of the specific criteria. I was only passing on what I have heard backed up by a few internet links.

[benjii]

Which is basically what I was saying but if it works then it works. Im not saying all loans before April 2007 are eligible either. Im not sure of the specific criteria. I was only passing on what I have heard backed up by a few internet links.

 

Furry muff!

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

http://www.creditissuesltd.co.uk/

 

Hi guys, a bloke I used to work with has set this company up with the sole purpose of helping people out with their unsecured debts.

 

If you have large amounts of unsecured debts and wish to see if they qualify under the Credit Consumer Act loop hole, then drop the company a line or email!

 

The site explains quite a bit, but he will run through any questions you have. He is a genuinely top bloke and will help anyone out.

[bridge too far]

I think this might be being covered on Panorama right now

[benjii]

http://www.creditissuesltd.co.uk/

 

Hi guys, a bloke I used to work with has set this company up with the sole purpose of helping people out with their unsecured debts.

 

If you have large amounts of unsecured debts and wish to see if they qualify under the Credit Consumer Act loop hole, then drop the company a line or email!

 

The site explains quite a bit, but he will run through any questions you have. He is a genuinely top bloke and will help anyone out.

 

For £450 up front + more to follow if you pursue the matter (unless your agreements are enforceable in which case you'll be charged £50 for each for the privilege of finding out).

Edited 10 November, 2008 by benjii

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

For £450 up front.

 

I am not sure of the t&c's, however I know that for each CCA challenged, a legal bod needs to write to the company in question to request a copy of the CCA and also sends a copy to the client direct. If the legal bod feels there is nothing in it and it wont work, I believe a refund of £400 is made, and only the £50 (which is charged for the letters the legal bod has done) has been lost.

 

Fair price IMO if you consider that you could end up ££££'s written off?

[Ponty]

I don't understand things like this... If you borrowed the money, pay it back. If you were too stupid to know it wasn't going to be free money, tough sh*t. People who worm their way out of debts of their own making are little better than benefit fraudsters IMO.

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

Ah in before the edit!

 

Yes, that is correct Benji, however, if you are struggling with your debts and have a lot of them, then a £50 fee is IMO worthwhile for saving thousands of pounds.

 

Imagine you have 3 x £5000 loans all at £150 p/m and £10,000 worth of credit cards which would set you back at £300 p/m your outgoings is £750 p/m. I believe the cost per application (if successful) is £1k per agreement so it would cost you £4k approx (assuming its only 1 credit card) however, turning a debt of £15k into only £4k and repayments of around £750 into £150ish per month would help a lot of people. Its not what its costing you, essentially, its what it is saving you. It only costs you money (and £50 at that) if it is shown for it to not work.

 

I believe that the initial information which you provide to the company, will enable them to have a decent idea if it will work before going ahead with it too.

 

These people are trained in what they are doing. They are not monkeys just sat there referring people on and taking money for it.

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

I don't understand things like this... If you borrowed the money, pay it back. If you were too stupid to know it wasn't going to be free money, tough sh*t. People who worm their way out of debts of their own making are little better than benefit fraudsters IMO.

 

Although I completely agree with what you say Ponty (and its my motto too - I try not to borrow any money at all, however if I do, I make sure the money is paid back asap and in full). There are always two sides to the coin.

 

I have come across many people who are just plain outright priorty retarded. They would rather pay their Sky bill to carry on watching that, or go on holiday than pay their mortgage and debts. These people I have no pity for. But the other side of the coin is that people losing their jobs, becoming ill and as such struggling financially due to this.

 

Thank god I have never been in this position and would never wish it upon anyone, however in these circumstances (especially watching Panorama at the moment) I feel this option is very much a viable one in which these people can become debt free (or reducing their debts significantly).

[EastleighSoulBoy]

If you have a high level of debt and a low income through loss of work or illness then you can seek free advice at the CAB. They will advise you of your best course of action be it, in order, a Debt Management Plan, Individual Voluntary Arrangement or Bankruptcy. Don't play into the hands of people offering you a quick way out which could cost a you a packet and leave you owing more!

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

If you have a high level of debt and a low income through loss of work or illness then you can seek free advice at the CAB. They will advise you of your best course of action be it, in order, a Debt Management Plan, Individual Voluntary Arrangement or Bankruptcy. Don't play into the hands of people offering you a quick way out which could cost a you a packet and leave you owing more!

 

No offense ESB but you are the voice of the niave. This is not an attack on you, it is common for people not dealing with finances day in day out to think that the CAB is a fully safeguarded route to take.

 

In essence the CAB is made up of inexperienced volunteers. No real training is required to become an advisor in the CAB and certainly no qualification which I am aware of. Now, in terms of surgery, who would you rather operated on you? A qualified surgeon or a bloke who can read a book on how to do it? Written by someone else.

 

Debt management plans (which is 99.9% of the time what the CAB recommend) only works if the lender is onside with the idea. Sure they may play along for a few weeks or if you are lucky a month or two, but eventually, they will want their money and as Panorama just showed, a lady whose step father was sectioned under the mental health act was refused a 'payment break' of 3 months.

 

Again, not a personal attack but anyone who would chose an IVA or bankruptcy over any other option is financially retarded. IVA companies have pounced on the little known bit of govt legislation which enables them to wipe off a large portion of the debts in 5 years, however what they fail to tell people or highlight is the severity of what it does to your credit file. Kiss goodbye to getting a mortgage in the next 10-15 years.

 

Just before the credit crucnch hit and the UK sub-prime companies were lending to the most risky of clientelle, an IVA was considered as serious (and some companies considered it more serious due to the fact it was relatively 'new') as bankruptcy. Its all too easy to make yourself bankrupt and enter into an IVA nowadays, but most people only look at todays gain and dont think of tomorrows costs.

 

This route, if successful, will not in any way affect your credit rating. The debt is legally classed as unenforcable, which in essence means the company who provided the loan or credit card f*cked up the agreement, so nothing is registered against you.

 

On top of this. If successful, will not COST you a penny. If I have £20k of unsecured debt and this process left me with only £5k. I have SAVED £15k, irrespective of whether the company who did it made £500 or £5000 from it so I do not agree whatsoever with your comment of 'could cost you a packet and leave you owing more'

 

These are not cowboys. They are people who are trained in what they are dealing with. The CAB do not have the legal power to do these agreements (hence why you need a legal bod to do it) and from what I am aware, there are not too many people trained in this sector, so it is a cost worth paying IMO. But as I said, you only pay the money, once you have been told your agreement is viable.

[benjii]

On top of this. If successful, will not COST you a penny. If I have £20k of unsecured debt and this process left me with only £5k. I have SAVED £15k, irrespective of whether the company who did it made £500 or £5000 from it so I do not agree whatsoever with your comment of 'could cost you a packet and leave you owing more'

 

These are not cowboys. They are people who are trained in what they are dealing with. The CAB do not have the legal power to do these agreements (hence why you need a legal bod to do it) and from what I am aware, there are not too many people trained in this sector, so it is a cost worth paying IMO. But as I said, you only pay the money, once you have been told your agreement is viable.

 

If you lose your court case it will have cost you £450+.

 

It seems to me that this company gets a lay-peron to give the agreement the once-over then instructs a solicitor.

 

Why not cut out the middle-man and chose your own solicitor?

[EastleighSoulBoy]

No offense ESB but you are the voice of the niave. This is not an attack on you, it is common for people not dealing with finances day in day out to think that the CAB is a fully safeguarded route to take.

 

In essence the CAB is made up of inexperienced volunteers. No real training is required to become an advisor in the CAB and certainly no qualification which I am aware of. Now, in terms of surgery, who would you rather operated on you? A qualified surgeon or a bloke who can read a book on how to do it? Written by someone else.

 

Debt management plans (which is 99.9% of the time what the CAB recommend) only works if the lender is onside with the idea. Sure they may play along for a few weeks or if you are lucky a month or two, but eventually, they will want their money and as Panorama just showed, a lady whose step father was sectioned under the mental health act was refused a 'payment break' of 3 months.

 

Again, not a personal attack but anyone who would chose an IVA or bankruptcy over any other option is financially retarded. IVA companies have pounced on the little known bit of govt legislation which enables them to wipe off a large portion of the debts in 5 years, however what they fail to tell people or highlight is the severity of what it does to your credit file. Kiss goodbye to getting a mortgage in the next 10-15 years.

 

Just before the credit crucnch hit and the UK sub-prime companies were lending to the most risky of clientelle, an IVA was considered as serious (and some companies considered it more serious due to the fact it was relatively 'new') as bankruptcy. Its all too easy to make yourself bankrupt and enter into an IVA nowadays, but most people only look at todays gain and dont think of tomorrows costs.

 

This route, if successful, will not in any way affect your credit rating. The debt is legally classed as unenforcable, which in essence means the company who provided the loan or credit card f*cked up the agreement, so nothing is registered against you.

 

On top of this. If successful, will not COST you a penny. If I have £20k of unsecured debt and this process left me with only £5k. I have SAVED £15k, irrespective of whether the company who did it made £500 or £5000 from it so I do not agree whatsoever with your comment of 'could cost you a packet and leave you owing more'

 

These are not cowboys. They are people who are trained in what they are dealing with. The CAB do not have the legal power to do these agreements (hence why you need a legal bod to do it) and from what I am aware, there are not too many people trained in this sector, so it is a cost worth paying IMO. But as I said, you only pay the money, once you have been told your agreement is viable.

 

Naive enough to have spoken to a close friend about this scheme? He is a retired bank manager and works part time as an advisor for the CAB.

 

At no stage did I infer that they were cowboys!

 

All I suggested was talking to the CAB who can give you the options available to you before you part with any money.

 

You do sound like you are on the hard sell with this line though.

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

If you lose your court case it will have cost you £450+.

 

It seems to me that this company gets a lay-peron to give the agreement the once-over then instructs a solicitor.

 

Why not cut out the middle-man and chose your own solicitor?

 

You could do that if a) you knew what you were looking for (which if you did, it shows you have a detailed knowledge of financing issues and it has to be questioned why you are in such financial difficulties) and b) you could find a solicitor qualified who specialises in this practise. Its not something which any solicitor would be very knowledgable in. Besides, by cutting out the middle man, you are likely to increase the costs as you stand a better chance finding out before it goes to the expensive solicitor if you use a company who can do it for you.

 

Naive enough to have spoken to a close friend about this scheme? He is a retired bank manager and works part time as an advisor for the CAB.

 

At no stage did I infer that they were cowboys!

 

All I suggested was talking to the CAB who can give you the options available to you before you part with any money.

 

You do sound like you are on the hard sell with this line though.

 

I agree, the CAB are free and yes they will give you advice, but from my experience, the CAB's advice is often not the best advice for the customer. An example being I had a client with a credit card he had missed payments on, they credit card company were on the verge of giving him a CCJ. Other than the missed payments on the credit card (which stay on your Experian credit file for 12 months) they credit file was fine. I suggested a remortgage to incorporate the credit card debt and would have saved the client a few hundred pounds on their outgoings. The client went to the CAB and the CAB told the client not to remortgage and to just pay £2 p/m on their credit card.

 

The client got a CCJ and consequently their credit file is impared for 6 years. They came back to me 6 months later wanted to take advantage of the remortgage I offered, but because they listened to the CAB and their credit file was now in a mess, I couldnt help them. They will struggle to get a mortgage for the next 6 years due to the advice the CAB gave them. Oh and the CCJ is secured against the property too.

 

Its a common misconception that the CAB is the be all and end all of financial advice. The way I look at it, is unless you have a financial qualification, should you really be giving financial advice to people?

 

IMO for the (financial side of the) CAB to work, they need to make it into a financial advice centre of some kind. Get the volunteers/workers to study CeMAPS of their FPC's so they are fully qualified. Dont get me wrong, the CAB are very good at all other areas, but IMO when it comes to finances, its best to leave it to the people who are qualified.

 

I am not 'hard selling' this idea at all ESB, I may no gain out of it what so ever. My point is, that I wanted to highlight this concept to people who were not aware of it, in the hope that it could help someone who is struggling.

 

If its not for you, then fine, your choice, I expect you are fairly well off ESB and Benji and you have no significant debts, you are only giving your opinion, and I feel it maybe one sided. If on the other hand, you were on the bread line and struggling, Im sure you would be willing to try anything within reason to help your situation out.

 

As I said, Im only bringing this to the attention of people who were not aware of it.

[Bud Fox]

 

I agree, the CAB are free and yes they will give you advice, but from my experience, the CAB's advice is often not the best advice for the customer. An example being I had a client with a credit card he had missed payments on, they credit card company were on the verge of giving him a CCJ. Other than the missed payments on the credit card (which stay on your Experian credit file for 12 months) they credit file was fine. I suggested a remortgage to incorporate the credit card debt and would have saved the client a few hundred pounds on their outgoings. The client went to the CAB and the CAB told the client not to remortgage and to just pay £2 p/m on their credit card.

 

 

I thought missed payments stay on your credit file for 6 years after you closed an account? That is certainly what Equifax say...

 

How long is this data kept on my Credit File?

 

The information will stay on your Credit File for 6 years from the date the account was ended

 

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

I thought missed payments stay on your credit file for 6 years after you closed an account? That is certainly what Equifax say...

 

Equifax maybe slightly different to Experian.

 

In terms of what I used to look at when brokering a mortgage, I would get a copy of experian. It would show the conduct of the clients payments for any credit for the last 12 months. It would give you an indicator, as to what the worst state of the account was in the last 36 months though.

 

For example.

 

Joe Bloggs

Credit Card

Balance £1000

Limit £2000

Conduct 000000000000 (the 0's indicate no missed payments)

Last 36 months 0

 

If John Smith who missed payments on his credit card were to undertake an experian report, it would show something similar to the below:

 

Conduct 433322101021

Last 36 months 4

 

If you could see the other 24 months as part of the conduct (which I believe you do with Equifax) and the 'last 36 months' figure was, say 6, you would expect to see the missed payments go up to 6, for example below:

 

321000001010210006543210101021033221

 

The 6 basically dentotes that the worst state the account has been in is 6 months arrears.

 

In terms of lending (and this all may change now as a result of the credit crunch) lenders really only concern themselves with IVA's, Bankruptcy, Arrears on mortgage (or current arrears on credit cards and loans and hire purchase etc), CCJ's and defaults.

 

Unless your 'credit score' was pretty poor, I would be surprised if lenders would decline you on the basis of a few missed payments from over a year ago, and generally, if you have kept on top of your credit since the missed payments over a year ago, you should have 'repaired' your credit score by a years time anyway.

[Bud Fox]

It appears that Equifax is a lot more comprehensive than Experian then!

 

It details every payment for every account you have had in the last 6 years, including those that have been closed.

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

It appears that Equifax is a lot more comprehensive than Experian then!

 

It details every payment for every account you have had in the last 6 years, including those that have been closed.

 

Quite possibly yes. However, it depends on which system lenders use. I know a lot of mortgages dont show on Equifax, so most lenders use Experian checks and dont even bother with Equifax. Equally, some stuff doesnt show on Experian, but does on Equifax.