Termination of Egg credit card agreement

[basa48]

Originally Posted by toymaker1

Hi Samanthasquig,

Assuming that you are referring to credit card agreements, I believe you are totally incorrect when you suggest that section 98 of CCA1974 gives either party the right to terminate whenever they like. The S98 right of any party to terminate (before the end of the period so specified) only applies to agreements in which a period for the duration of the agreement is specified in the agreement, - in which case the agreement can be terminated before the end of that specified period.
Therefore S98 does not apply to credit card agreements, where no period for the duration of the credit card agreement is specified. Hope that makes sense!

regards
Peter

Agreed, I thought that this was the generally accepted interpretation (s98 does not apply to CCs).

[phatram]

Originally Posted by phatram

Egg have now sent a load of copy statements up to April this year !!
Amazing, 'cos Mrs P hasn't had any statements sent to her since they terminated the agreement last year. They of course have NOT sent anything else she asked for in the Subject Access Request.

I forgot to say that none of these "created" statements from the last 18 months have any overlimit charges or late fees on them.

[diddydicky]

Originally Posted by basa48

Agreed, I thought that this was the generally accepted interpretation (s98 does not apply to CCs).

and as i see it the creditor cannot terminate only part of an agreement

he cant say the agreement is terminated except the provision for you to pay 5% of the outstanding balance per month

the agreement once terminated cannot then be enforced if their is an outstanding balance on it

as i understand it you would then have a situation where there is a debt which is a credit card debt so has to be regulated under the consumer credit act but if the debtor refuses to agree to an agreement how can the creditor enforce the debt

[diddydicky]

Originally Posted by r_007

I am very sorry to have to do this, as I hope to have some legal argument that can win the case too.

However, s67 - 73 is about cancellation of the agreement within the "cooling period" only. I.e, usually so many days after entering into the contract. It is not applicable in our case, as far as I am aware.

Termination of the agreement is bringing it to an end/cancelling it. s87-89 is for accounts that are in default only. This section is not applicable whatsoever unless one has defaulted on their account.

Which leaves us which s98 - non-defaulted credit agreements. This isn't applicable to credit cards.

The act IS silent regarding termination of credit cards that are not in default.

I am not confident in your belief that, as you say "credit agreements which are not in default are not, indeed cannot, be terminated by the creditor". I am sorry but this has to be untrue!

If this was the case, a creditor would not be able to bring an agreement to an end if there was a serious breach of an agreement (criminal activity, third party usage etc etc) but there was no default. As I stated earlier, they would then be "locked in" to the agreement with no escape route and I really cannot see that the law would have intended this.

Most credit agreements state that the bank may cancel/end/terminate the agreement subject to the service of any notice required by law. If the credit card is not in default, then there is no requirement under CCA 1974 to provide notice?

Therefore, it looks like, though unfair it definitely is to the consumer, banks can cancel agreements without notice.

Where does this leave us? In my mind...and it is late and I'm tired and getting confused by it all ... we are left not with an agreement but with an outstanding balance that must be repaid. I agree that we surely cannot be bound by the contract and I would love to think that this meant the outstanding balance could no longer be pursued. But unfortunately, I don't think this is the case.

Here is where I am sure, as a property lawyer, when a mortgage company repossessed a house and sells it...if they don't reclaim all of the monies from the sale of the house and there is an outstanding balance owed - the mortgage agreements is no longer in place BUT they COULD pursue the individual for the outstanding debt. However, this is rarely done in practice because people who have been repossessed are highly unlikely to have any money/assets that can be used to repay the further debt. So the companies usually write it off.

Similarly with our case, lets say the banks could cancel our agreement - the outstanding balance becomes a personal debt that they could pursue us with and take to court etc?

I hope you're following me.

I hate realising that they might be right. SOMEBODY PLEASE restore my faith and tell me something that makes me realise they are wrong again.

We have used the money, think of it as a loan - we get the money, don't get any more money...but repay it over time.

I think the repayment facility at the end of the credit card agreement is more like a way of us paying off the "loan" now...rather than paying off our credit but being able to take further credit.

Ah! It's late and I'm blabbing on. Someone please tell me they realise/understand what I'm saying... i.e, after all this...are we wrong?

so when the agreement is terminated then the old method of repayment is gone the creditor says pay 10% per month the debtor says no ill offer 0.007% per month

neither agree- would a court place at a disadvatage and innocent borrower who had had the safety net of the CCA (which is an act to PROTECT the consumer from an unscrupulous lender) i think not!

[diddydicky]

Originally Posted by BigEddieChek

I didn't say we were going to launch a class action.
We have a group who have stopepd paying and contested that there is no contract in place.

Egg have gone very quiet.
We have since found that the majority of Egg's CCAs are unenforceable, and furthermore that Egg know this (Citi did an analysis as part of their due diligence).

And yes, our media contact is documenting as we go along.

It does appear that the CCA route is the best route as opposed to the contact route. Not necessarily that there is no merit in the contract route. Rather that the CCA route is proven and easier.

Hope that answers your questions.

surely what you need is one of the 160,000 customers that is not a home owner, has no assets and is thinking maybe of personal bankruptcy to take these shiesters on with the help of everyone on here to put his case together


he can represent himself in the high court- if he wins he wins and if he loses (doubtful) he still wins because the other sides costs can be 10 million - they wont get F**k all

[oxfordkatie]

Please help. Hope you don't mind me hijacking this thread for a quick minute. I have an egg debt and need to post a new thread for advice but I can't see a new thread button anywhere on my screen. How do I start a thread? Thanks.

[cosalt]

Hi Oxfordkatie,

Go back to the list of egg threads, just above the list you will find a new thread button ( looks like the post reply button) you cant start a new thread from an existing thread, only from the list page - hopefully that makes sense!!!!

Welocme to CAG !

Cosalt

[basa48]

Also oxfordkatie don't forget to remind us here of your new thread when you've got it going so we can pop over and offer advice.

[BigEddieChek]

Originally Posted by diddydicky

and as i see it the creditor cannot terminate only part of an agreement

he cant say the agreement is terminated except the provision for you to pay 5% of the outstanding balance per month

the agreement once terminated cannot then be enforced if their is an outstanding balance on it

as i understand it you would then have a situation where there is a debt which is a credit card debt so has to be regulated under the consumer credit act but if the debtor refuses to agree to an agreement how can the creditor enforce the debt

You are quite correct.
We are taking several routes with Egg on this one and they have got their knickers in quite a twist.

Not taken action against them yet, but it is highly likely that we will.

Although the CCA route is a proven one, and is probably best for the individual claimant.

[helpingfriend]

Originally Posted by basa48

Also oxfordkatie don't forget to remind us here of your new thread when you've got it going so we can pop over and offer advice.

Would you please pop over to my thread and see if you can offer some help:

helpingfriend vs Egg

Thanks

[blackntan]

My Egg card was ended while not in default, I am one of the 160,000.

A year later I had problems keeping up repayments and Egg defaulted me, sharing my data with credit reference agencies.

Egg then terminated my account again.

The debt was passed to Moorcroft.

I SARs Egg.

They replied without the original letter ending my agreement.

The Information Commisioners Office have suggested that I write again asking for the original letter. I have now done this and am awaiting Egg's reply.

My question is, if Egg reply with the same sort of nonsense they have sent others on this thread and I make a formal complaint to Information Commissioner`s Office what is likely to happen next?

[blackntan]

I recently wrote to Information Commissioner`s Office about a default registered against me by a store card where the agreement did not contain the interest rate. Their reply was that the company had a right to share the data even if the agreement was unenforceable. "The question of whether a legal liability exists in relation to a credit agreement is quite seperate from the question of whether such a liability may be enforced by the creditor."

I will upload this letter if anyone wants to see the whole letter.

Bearing this in mind are Information Commissioner`s Office likely to take any action even if Egg are in breach of my Subject Access Request request.

I personally think that Information Commissioner`s Office are just a quango that are all talk about the sharing of data but no enforcement. What have they done about the various discs that have gone missing with all of our personal data from the NHS, Child Benefit data and media blagging and so on? Yes somtimes they may expose illegal data sharing but what action are they taking about it?

[phatram]

Originally Posted by blackntan

My Egg card was ended while not in default, I am one of the 160,000.

A year later I had problems keeping up repayments and Egg defaulted me, sharing my data with credit reference agencies.

Egg then terminated my account again.

The debt was passed to Moorcroft.

I SARs Egg.

They replied without the original letter ending my agreement.

The Information Commisioners Office have suggested that I write again asking for the original letter. I have now done this and am awaiting Egg's reply.

My question is, if Egg reply with the same sort of nonsense they have sent others on this thread and I make a formal complaint to Information Commissioner`s Office what is likely to happen next?

Snap.
Mrs P

[HP Mum]

hello, new to this forum but have spent hours reading some of the threads and posts and now feel ready to participate !

I had an Egg account, since August 03. I was paying regularly, sometimes a bit late, but on the whole always paid. Egg terminated my account, like they did for 160,000 others. I can not find the termination letter though. Can someone tell me the apx date in 2008 that these letters were sent out ?

Unaware of the implications of Egg unlawfully terminating the agreement, which I have read about here, I carried on paying my monthly minimum or sometimes more. Until the end of 08 when I took a long hard look at my financial circumstances and decided that my mortgage was my priority debt and I could only afford tiny amounts/month to each credit card company I had accounts (debts) with.

I had various letter correspondence with Egg from November to Jan 09. Then I got a Default Notice sent on 21 Jan. On the 22 Jan Egg wrote complaining I had not responded to the Default Notice - hardly surprising given it was only the next day ! On the 23 Feb, Egg sent me a "Your Egg Card Account has been terminated" - due to my failure to satisfactorily comply with the Default Notice. (Despite they had already terminated it apx 1 year ago). They said a dca would deal with me now. I got passed on to DLC and have since been making token monthly payments to DLC. They have now passed me on to Aplins.
I guess I should have stopped paying when they first terminated my account at the start of 08. So now, what do I send Egg, DLC and Aplins ? Do I ask for a copy of the original Termination letter from them ? As well as the original credit agreement ? Do I send all 3 a letter saying I believe they have acted unlawfully ? Or just Egg, as I never gave them permission to pass on my details to the 3rd parties once they terminated the Agreement ?

There is actually apx £4700+ owed to Egg.

Advice is welcome

[diddydicky]

Originally Posted by HP Mum

hello, new to this forum but have spent hours reading some of the threads and posts and now feel ready to participate !

I had an Egg account, since August 03. I was paying regularly, sometimes a bit late, but on the whole always paid. Egg terminated my account, like they did for 160,000 others. I can not find the termination letter though. Can someone tell me the apx date in 2008 that these letters were sent out ?

Unaware of the implications of Egg unlawfully terminating the agreement, which I have read about here, I carried on paying my monthly minimum or sometimes more. Until the end of 08 when I took a long hard look at my financial circumstances and decided that my mortgage was my priority debt and I could only afford tiny amounts/month to each credit card company I had accounts (debts) with.

I had various letter correspondence with Egg from November to Jan 09. Then I got a Default Notice sent on 21 Jan. On the 22 Jan Egg wrote complaining I had not responded to the Default Notice - hardly surprising given it was only the next day ! On the 23 Feb, Egg sent me a "Your Egg Card Account has been terminated" - due to my failure to satisfactorily comply with the Default Notice. (Despite they had already terminated it apx 1 year ago). They said a dca would deal with me now. I got passed on to DLC and have since been making token monthly payments to DLC. They have now passed me on to Aplins.
I guess I should have stopped paying when they first terminated my account at the start of 08. So now, what do I send Egg, DLC and Aplins ? Do I ask for a copy of the original Termination letter from them ? As well as the original credit agreement ? Do I send all 3 a letter saying I believe they have acted unlawfully ? Or just Egg, as I never gave them permission to pass on my details to the 3rd parties once they terminated the Agreement ?

There is actually apx £4700+ owed to Egg.

Advice is welcome

as a start i would suggest a CCA request and under seperate cover a Subject Access Request and start from there

[HP Mum]

thanks, but should I send the Subject Access Request to Egg and the CCA to the most recent DCA ?

[diddydicky]

yep

[diddydicky]

and to save time i would add a sentence to the cca request letter that it is their responsibility to get the agreement from the lender of they do not have it

[brokebutnotbeatn]

Hi Guys, I have read this thread from beginning to end and whilst I don't have time for a battle I am really mad. I propose sending the following letter, recorded delivery (printed name, no signature) to EGG drawn upon what I've read and seen posted in this forum thread and whilst I'd like to send it tomorrow I really want your input/advise as I'm new to this so I hope you're subscribing to this thread! Note, I am not trying to use a legal loophole to wriggle out of paying money borrowed and I am trying to act fairly. If EGG do not respond appropriately (unlikely) then I will take this to the courts as an unpaid debt - but am I misguided? Here goes:


Dear Sir/Madam,

Please note this letter has been sent recorded delivery.

Account Number: xxxx

Following a recent letter date 11th July and received 14th July regarding a credit card account that failed to acknowledge a debt plan managed and run by XXX since May 2009, I reviewed the account and note that I have been and am still paying a monthly sum to Egg plc to an account that was ended, voluntarily by Egg plc, 35 days after I received a letter, from Egg, dated 31st January 2008. Since Egg had not served me with a Default Notice under S87(1) of CCA 1974 I conclude that Egg chose to forfeit any liabilities by me to this agreement.

Having studied the CCA 1974 I can find no reference that validates the agreement’s terms and conditions as the account was not in default. The CCA 1974 clearly states the following,

(1) Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a default notice) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement
(a) to terminate the agreement, or (b) to demand earlier payment of any sum...
1) The default notice must be in the prescribed form and specify--(a) the nature of the alleged breach;

I have subsequently taken legal advice and been advised that, as this account was ended whilst I was not in default, Egg’s termination of the account is in breach of s87 of the CCA 1974 and it is therefore an unlawfull rescission of contract and I have been advised to claim damages for this and for damage to my creditworthiness by Egg's action. I refer to the authority of Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society - [1996] 4 All ER 119. Please do not respond by quoted your T&Cs as those not in accordance with the CCA 1974 are void. Your T&Cs are not in accordance with the CCA 1974 and EGG PLC are not above English law on this respect.

I must therefore request that you refund my payments made to this account since March 2008. I must also insist that you cease providing information to credit reference agencies regarding this terminated account and remove any DN subsequently applied to it.

As you ended voluntarily the contract and were thus in breach of the contract, this should mean the account be set to zero balance. However, once you have refunded the monies incorrectly paid to the account since March 2008 I will continue to pay the balance owed at the time the account was terminated. Note, that this is a gesture of good will on my part. As a gesture of goodwill I will also accept that you reduce the balance owing at the time you terminated the account by the amount subsequently incorrectly paid and I will continue to pay this revised outstanding balance through the debt management plan – the monthly figure for which will be determined by my appointed third party XXX and advised accordingly.

Please note that you have 35 working days [I will send this recorded delivery tomorrow so date will be Monday 7th September 2009??? I think this allows for the August bank holiday] to remedy this or suggest a date by when this will be remediedbut within 30-working days of said date i.e. on or before Thursday 8th October 2009, after which I will apply interest to the monies owed to me at an appropriate rate as advised by my legal counsel [help here guys. I’d really like to put a rate in here] and commence action to obtain the monies owed to me through the court [guys, advise here please. But it seems like a route to pursue. As it stands they will owe me money and I can pursue that?]. If legal action is your preferred route, then be advised that I will appoint the appropriate legal counsel and bring my case forcefully and vigorously as I consider I have acted fairly and have given you sufficient time to remedy the situation.

To summarise:
1)On 21st march 2008, or thereabouts, EGG plc did voluntarily and unlawfully terminate our credit card agreement, and in doing so breached said agreement
2)EGG Plc has subsequently pursued monies on and applied interest to the said terminated agreement quoting T&Cs that are not in accordance with the CCA 1974 and are therefore void
3)On or before Monday 7th September 2009 the monies received since 21st March to be either returned to me OR deducted from the balance owing on the credit card account on the date of termination. Any DN applied to the account shall also be removed.
4)If, for administrative reasons, it is not possible to complete point 3) above, then a letter advising me of this shall be sent to me on or before Monday 7th September 2009 advising the date that this shall be completed by, that shall be on or before Thursday 8th October 2009
5)Failure to complete points 3) or 4) above shall result in the application of interest to the monies owed and the pursuant of the subsequent debt through the courts.


I shall continue to allow you to receive a monthly sum as laid out in the debt managment plan of which you have already been advised, again as a gesture of goodwill.


Finally, in order to provide a clear paper trail for litigation purposes, you should only correspond to me in writing.

Thanks you for your prompt attention to this matter,

Yours faithfully

[basa48]

One thing that I find erroneous in this argument ....

s.87 states:

(1) Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a default notice) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement
(a) to terminate the agreement, or (b) to demand earlier payment of any sum...

IMO this section is only applicable after a debtor breach. It does not apply to this situation.

A much better argument (IMO) would be s.98, this bars the creditor from terminating.