Thread: Credit card debt before 2007

A firm in Manchester called Cartal Client seem to have it sussed but you have to pay them £500 up front.

That's just for starters they also want 30% of any money refunded and 30% of any debt written off, oh and plus VAT

Was wondering if we could do it ourselves

Yes.

See here::
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...agreement.html

Consumer Credit Act template - Consumer Wiki

can anyone plz help?? have cap1 credit card and sent 3 letters requesting CCA.More than 30 day s elapsed in time and still they keep writing to request a signature(which i have been advised not to give!!!) Is debt now unenforcable???? shall i proceed with next stage??? Any help would be really appreciated

Make a digital signature:
a) You can do this yourself, see here:
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...signature.html

b) Sign up to CAG's Signguard for £4 here:
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...lsignature.php

It certainly won't be unenforceable if you continue to refuse to provide your confirmation of identity (signature). This is a basic requirement - and to refuse to do so in the mistaken belief that it could be misused will disadvantage you.

There you go again buzby, talking sh.., I mean, nonsense again.

Really?
You place yourself in a situation that disadvantages you, and you object to me pointing this out? I've pointed this out before - and it looks as though, for you, I have to do it again.

Since the reason put forward NOT for providing said signature is to 'prevent it being copied' (misused), shows a naive disregard for how this works, making the complainant appear (at best) ill-advised, and (at worst) a nutter.

Even if you believe the signature will be copied - the legal term for this is 'forged' and is a crime punishable in the criminal courts, wouldn't it be great if the offending firm did this? Not only can you involve the police, it makes the matter a criminal one whereas before it was only you Vs them. If you think a firm is going to risk everything simply to defraud the OP, you've lost your grip on reality.

No two signatures are the same, but it becomes VERY easy to modify your signature in a way that is distinctive to you (if copied) especially as all you have to do is retain a copy and refer to it to 'prove' that it was done,
Indeed, of the 7 times I have done this as part of a dispute process, I got the information I required and nobody attempted to misrepresent my signature (shame, as I wanted it to happen).

So, thanks for your vote of no-confidence. Coming from you it gives me all the vindication I need. And I don't need to be as disrespectful as you were.

The point is that there is no legal reason why you have to sign a s.78 request.

Therefore, a company is not acting reasonably in using this as an excuse to fail to comply with your statutory request.

They clearly dont want to or cant comply.

Nothing to do with forging sigs.

And how would you convince the company you are apply to, that you are indeed the person stated in the letter? It is more than just a courtesy to sign, it signifies (!) that the person signing is requesting the information. To type such a signature, or not do so because there 'is no requirement' means that as there is no verification that the requestor is who they say it is, anyone - a private investigator, nosey neighbour could no the same, and following your premise - get the info without fear or favour.

Since the DPA provides safeguards additional to the S78 request, the firms must be satisfied that the requestor is the data subject, and to provide a signature is the way this is done.

On a tangent. I have in the last week been asked to provide my date of birth three times in order to purchase products. Previously, a statement of 'Over 21' (then 'Over 18') was enough. Not now. No valid reason is provided, but usually 1/1/01 is enough.... Tried to sign up for a mobile phone contract? No DoB, no phone. Yes there's no legal requirement, other than to be 'of age' to enter into such an agreement.

Of course, the REAL reason is so that they can correctly allocate your data to your credit reference file so mistakes are minimised. Therefore their reason for the additional data has nothing to do with the use of the handset or the purchased services. But folk happily give a DoB on request. Are they mad, or just desperate for a phone?

As to the topic at hand - if a firm does not satisfy itself that the s78 request id from the data subject, they are in breach. Why you want to make so much of NOT providing same is still incomprehensible, and results in the needless refusal to supply - and a perfect excuse not to comply with their terms of supply.

i have done a digital signature but am wondering whether to send or not???? I think i will go round in circles with cap1 if i dont??? Any advice???

not being funny, but don't they already have your signed application forms for the credit card?

I mean you must have signed something taking out the card? why are you worried about sending your signature to a company that probably already has a copy of your signature on file?

thats the point danielr,they may not have a copy and will cut and paste it to cca!!thats why i am so unsure what to do

well, miss form your signature,
underline it,
dot an I etc...

And TAKE A COPY of how you signed it, so you can easily spot if they;re trying to re-use it. (However the chances of that happening are indeed slim).