Written by John Kruse, one of the leading experts on Bailiff Law, this consumer friendly guide is essential reading for anyone who comes into contact with a bailiff.
The book is easy to understand and clearly explains the rights
a bailiff has, and also what they cannot do when collecting debts and repossessing goods etc.
Had this card since 2004 not missed any payments until nov 2008 when i came into financial difficulties.. I cca'd them and this is what i had through along with 6 pages of t&cs and a standard letter you get when you receive your new card.. dont thik this is enforcable but could do with an expert to look over it please?.
im going to send this then....
Thank you for your response to my request under the Consumer Credit Act section 78.
I am pleased to see that you confirm this as a true copy of the original agreement executed by yourselves on the XXXXX.
As you must realise this agreement does not conform to sections 60(1) and 61(1) of the Consumer credit Act 1974 and would therefore only be enforceable by a court under s65. However, the absence of any prescribed terms means that a court would be prevented from enforcing it under s127(3)"
You had until (date here) to provide me with the true copy I requested. After that date you entered into default of my request and I am therefore advising that the matter is now in dispute . Whilst the matter is in dispute, you are not permitted to ask for any payment, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you. Furthermore, whilst the dispute remains, you are not entitled to charge any interest on the account, make any further charges to the account or pass the account to anybody else.
Please note you may also consider this letter a statutory notice under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any data in relation to this account with immediate effect. This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies including any defaults. Should you refuse to comply, you must within 21 days provide me with a detailed Breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data. It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’, you must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends.
Should you fail to respond within 21 days, I will expect that this means you agree to remove all such data
I am looking at something very similar for a friend, his application form is the same as yours.
As what to do next? from reading other threads and yours it is clear that just writing back and saying it does not comply will generate a series of letters saying that they think is does.
I am thinking of writing to RBS saying that all payments will be stopped and if they think they have a case take my friend to court.
Dispatch, “We have a 911, Armed Robbery in progress, see Surplus Store corner of Peebles Drive and West 24th Street”
can you scan the default notice as that could be something to look at? Also when - if - were you defaulted - can you check with experian or something rather than rely on what triton say?
Triton stopped after one letter to me when I stated they had naughtily asked for whole amount but were not supposed to as I was not in default (yet!!)
Write back to both RBS and Triton and tell if they cannot produce a copy of the signed agreement and not an application form that complies with the ruling taken from Wilson and another v Hurstanger Ltd 04/04 2007, they can go and get lost and you are not paying another penny.
Qoted below...where the appeal court judges said this
sparkie
9. It is not necessary or rewarding to go on a grand tour of the legislation in order to explain the issues we have to decide. Put shortly section 60 (1) of the Act gives power to the Secretary of State to make regulations as to the form and content of documents embodying regulated agreements. Section 61 (1) provides that a regulated agreement is not properly executed unless it is in a document containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to the regulations made under section 60 (1). An improperly executed agreement is enforceable against the debtor only on an order of the court (section 65 (1)), but no such an order can be made unless it contains all the prescribed terms (section 127 (3)).
33. In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under section 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127 (3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement. More detailed requirements, which are designed to ensure that the debtor is made aware, so far as possible, of specified information (including information contained in the minimum terms) are to be found in Schedule 1. I agree. The discretionary power under section 65 (1) to order enforcement of an agreement which does not comply with schedule 1 may be exercised on terms discharging the debtor from having to pay any sum payable under the agreement (section 127 (2)).
Hi Thanks for the reply it is very interesting. Do I need to quote all of the above or just notify them that they are still in default as they have not complied with the regulations? Is there a template letter for this here?
Hi Andreamour, it looks the same as mine.
I'm no expert but I have been told on this site that the fact they have not named a date for remedy, but said 17 days after the date above makes it invalid.
I'm sure others will confirm if this is the case.
I received the same Default Notice in April.I was told in my thread (by 42man) that mine was valid :?
I also presumed that they had to state a date for remedy, as saying 17days after the date of this letter is too vague.Do they mean from the next day? or the day after that? etc etc
Not Sure If This 1s Enforceable From Rbs???
Reply With Quote
