Me v's 1st Credit

[FunkyFox]

I had a Credit Card which has been assigned to 1st Credit. I sent a CCA request and a data protection request last week and have had a letter advising me that they acknowledge that the account is in dispute? and that my request has passed to their client and this may take up to 30 days to respond.

If the account has been assigned why should I care if they sent it to their client? Surely the responsibilty is with them and after the 12 days its up to 1st Credit to provide the details and after the 42 they commit the offence?

Should I respond to their letter or just sit and wait to see what they come up with? Advice on my next steps gratefully received.

Thanks, FF

[maroondevo52]

Hi, FF.

I'd just sit and wait, see what they come up with.



Regards.

Scott.

[Delfi101]

Originally Posted by FunkyFox

I had a Credit Card which has been assigned to 1st Credit. I sent a CCA request and a data protection request last week and have had a letter advising me that they acknowledge that the account is in dispute? and that my request has passed to their client and this may take up to 30 days to respond.

I had a similar thing with first Crudit ... I'd CCA'd Barclaycard in August.This shoddy lot sent me a threatening letter in early Jan to which I responded by telling them the account was in dispute and B/C had no right to pass my details over to them.

They promised to get back to me within 30 days and it's now nearly 4 months and counting ... nada, nothing, zip ...


D

[FunkyFox]

As Victor Meldrew would say....'I don't belive it!'.

My friends at FC have only gone and produced a document after nearly 4 months.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...fish-front.jpg

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...dfish-back.jpg

Now it looks to me as if it is an application form and all the prescribed terms are on the second page without the signature. It appears to me that they are microfiche copies although I could be wrong.

Do you think this is enforceable. My understanding is that the signature needs to be on the same page as the prescribed terms unless there is anything linking front to back, which there isn't.

Other points to note page 2 starts paragraph 2 through 4 (where's paragraph 1?) and the office use only section is not completed. Suspicious?

Is CPR 16 7.3 absolute. i.e. do they HAVE to produce orginals of the copies of docuements they attach to any POC.

Is there any case law that mentions the need for the signature to be on the same page as the terms. Has anyone had any success with cases on this point.

Attack being the best form of defence at this point what should I say in my letter when I respond. Any advice or pointers you can give me on th is matter would be gratefully recieved.

Thanks, FF

[Alphageek]

It's a little hard to read in parts, but I certainly can't see a Creditor's Signature.

They are allowed to leave signatures off copy docs as I am sure you know, but I would hazard a guess that this is an Unexecuted agreement.

I also think you're right in that page 2 should be referred to in page 1.

Starting at paragraph 2 is also a little suspicious.

[FunkyFox]

Originally Posted by Alphageek

It's a little hard to read in parts, but I certainly can't see a Creditor's Signature.

Thanks for your reply. There is in fact some intials in the box underneath 'Your right to Cancel' box, I blocked them out for some unknown reason! So I guess its executed.

Another interesting point is that apart from the signature its not my handwriting so I'm guessing it was completed in a motorway services or something, although I'm prettty sure I would not have done that. The more I look the more I'm convinced that page 2 is not related to page 1.

[veryweary]

Under 'About this agreement' mid bottom left hand corner page 1, it mentions have you read terms and condions especially condition 16 Personal Data.

It's hard to read, is there a condition 16 anywhere, if not, does that make a difference?

[FunkyFox]

Originally Posted by veryweary

Under 'About this agreement' mid bottom left hand corner page 1, it mentions have you read terms and condions especially condition 16 Personal Data.

It's hard to read, is there a condition 16 anywhere, if not, does that make a difference?

That my friend is a stroke of genius! There is no condition 16 on the documents I posted. In addtion they did sent me a full set of
Morgan Stanley terms and conditions which as well as having 28/4/08 and 15_Plat_TC_0508 printed on the bottom and my card number handwritten across the top conditon 16 in this document refers to changing your card type! Its section 15 which is personal data on what they sent me.

I think they have made a not very clever attempt to convince me that these documents are linked together, which they are clearly not.

I will now write back to them pointing out these dispcrepancies and explaining that should they proceed with any action against me I would require them to produce original documents as per CPR as the signed page is an unenforceable document and I don't believe that page 2 is from the same document.

Any other advice or guidance on how to approach this now?

[veryweary]

As an expert hasn't dropped by yet, always a good idea to pm a link to your thread to one of the knowledgeable CCA forum experts, and get their valuable advice on what you've been sent.

Reading other 1stC threads, notice they often issue court papers/SD's once they've sent a copy of CCA/application form, despite knowing and being told it's an unenforceable copy. Sometimes months later.

But they still have to produce the original CCA as well as NOA /Default in court, and it's doubtful they have them. I'm just a few weeks behind you with 1stC, still waiting on a document and trying to learn/understand the CCA 1974 Act so I can defend when my time comes.
VW

[FunkyFox]

Thank you for your help and support VW. I sent a long letter to FC yesterday outling in detail the inconsistancies in the the document they sent and that any action would require the original documents to presented in court to confirm their validity. I don't expect they will take a blind bit of notice but one can hope.

Hopefully I have at least given them something to think about. Here's to hoping!

[FunkyFox]

Well just as one bites the dust Back to Court after Set Aside - HELP PLEASE**WON** another one raises its very ugly head again.

Had a letter from the new improved LCS Solicitors today (no more Mr DB Davies - maybe my letters to the SRA did the trick) saying I have until 11 Nov to pay up.

It also says that they are going to add 8% interest from the date of the assignment? I thought I had read they cannot do this but cannot find a definative answer anywhere.

I will right back reminding them it is in dispute but would like to correct them about the interest. Any thoughts?

Thanks, FF