I write further to your letter dated 12 December 2007 and your response to my sec 78 Consumer Credit Act request.

First and foremost I would remind you that harassment of a debtor is contrary to sec 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970. I would appreciate you contacting Mercers Debt Collections who are working on your behalf and remind them of this. On the 16th Dec 2007 a collector working on your behalf encroached on my property without my knowledge or consent, if your unconscionable cavalier attitude continues in your quest to collect this disputed debt then I shall report you to the relevant authorities as well has applying for a restraining order through the county courticon. I hope I have made my self clear on this.

Secondly, the Application form you have forwarded in compliance with my request does not conform to the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 2 (1) and is contrary to sec 59 (1) CCA 1974. Furthermore, whilst a creditor remains in default of their obligation pursuant of sec 78 he is precluded from enforcement until the default is remedied.

It is my belief that the Application form you’ve forwarded is binding pursuant to sec 172 (1) therefore it is unenforceable by virtue sec 127 CCA 1974.

Finally, a default was entered on my credit file whilst Barclaycard remained in default it is my belief that such action is defamatory and will give reason for claiming compensation (Kpohrar v Woolwich Building Society 1996), and in any case Barclaycard are precluded from taking any further action as the amount specified in the default notice is incorrect (Woodchester v Swayne).

I require the removal of the default notice forthwith, and I await your response.



Yours Faithfully

Similar Threads: