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.
I have had an Egg card since january 2003.
I CCA'd them and they sent a copy of their CCA with the usual approved/personal limit stuff and no interest rate for the cash adavnces.
There is no cooling off line in the agreenment and no charges in the agreement.
Mine is the same as many that are posted in Egg Credit Agreements-what do i think is wrong with them
They sent a set of T&Cs but they are a straight print off from their PC showing defalt cahrges at £20.
Should they not have sent me a statement of account.
I've tried to get my head round this unenforceable/enforcable by court thing but I'm strugling. The minds on here have got a much better grasp of the CCA than I.
THe account has been run pretty much upto date but with some charges.
What I'm after is some one to point me in the right direction (but in simple english) and any template letters their may be so that I can challenge my CCA.
I was thinking of going down the road of "even though your CCA is no good i will buy the debt off you before you flog it to a DCA"
Any thoughts help or pointers to the right thread would be greatly appreciated.
Can you copy it to your pc and then copy and paste onto your thread?
I've done it through photobucket and not had any problems with odd emails etc., if thats what your worried about also after you've done it you can delete the copy so nobody can read it.
DG
I have no legal training my knowledge comes from my personal life experiences
Please help keep the forum alive by making a donation
have you been there and got the Tshirt.
i really need someone to hold my hand.
katedog
If you mean has a court declared my agreement unenforceable, then no not yet.
I'm not at all sure I will take on Egg over this on my own to be fair. A lot depends on if there is any direction from other similar cases I could rely on as precedent, but that seems some way off.
On the other hand I'm not sure Egg have the bottle to take this before a judges. Egg seem very reluctant to push this one, I've had all the threatening letters, DNs and DCAs chasing me all the way to the courtroom door, but so far they've haven't gone in or even opened it.
If you mean has a court declared my agreement unenforceable, then no not yet.
I'm not at all sure I will take on Egg over this on my own to be fair. A lot depends on if there is any direction from other similar cases I could rely on as precedent, but that seems some way off.
On the other hand I'm not sure Egg have the bottle to take this before a judges. Egg seem very reluctant to push this one, I've had all the threatening letters, DNs and DCAs chasing me all the way to the courtroom door, but so far they've haven't gone in or even opened it.
Thanks for that basa
builds a bit of confidence.
how long has yours been going on?
have you mot tried to get the DN removed if you already disputed the debt?
builds a bit of confidence.
how long has yours been going on?
have you mot tried to get the DN removed if you already disputed the debt?
I first disputed the account in early March ! (Not paid a penny since then!).
The only way to remove a DN is to get a court to do it and even then it's not easy. Basically you have to show the debt was never legally repayable thus by definition could never be late or in default. The argument for this is that if the agreement is unenforceable, there is case law that says the monies advanced as credit were in fact gifted and not repayable.
Hi everyone I have just drafted this response to Egg would appreciate any observations/comments before I post it. (thanks to all those who have PM'd with help and those whos thrteads I have stolen from)
Unfortunately the Egg Card Agreement you have provided does not comply with s 61(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the associated regulations for various reasons in as much that, and not limited to, not all the prescribed terms are contained within the document
* There is no “credit limit”. The terms “approved” or “individual” are not prescribed terms
* There is no rate of interest stated for cash advances
* There is no reference to “charges on default”
thus it is not properly executed and is therefore only enforceable by an order of the court by virtue of s 65 of the same act, and Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 Schedule 6:
It is the lack of the correct prescribed and other required terms in an improperly executed agreement that is a very clear default, not necessarily your response to my s78 request and it is for these reasons that I DISPUTE the alleged agreement.
In that respect I draw your attention to Consumer Credit Act 1974 s127(3) which states “The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a) (signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner)”.
You should note that in the opinion of the Office of Fair Trading, creditors should not suggest that they have a signed compliant credit agreement where they are unable to provide evidence to support this, to do so could be a misleading action under Reg.5 of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations.
You are reminded that the following applies in relation to this alleged agreement whilst it is in dispute.
You:
* are not entitled, while the dispute continues, to enforce the agreement.
* may not demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you.
* may not add further interest or any charges to the account.
* may not pass the account to a third party.
* may not register any information in respect of the account with any credit reference agency.
* may not issue a default notice related to the account.
Please note you should consider this letter as notice under section 10 of the Data Protection Act (1998 ) to cease processing, with immediate effect, any data in relation to this account, both within your own internal records and records with any third party agencies as this likely to cause substantial damage or substantial distress to me or to another.
In clarification: To register information with a credit reference agency, you must have written consent from the data subject to collate and share such information. This consent is given in the form of a signed and compliant credit agreement and is a clear requirement of the Data Protection Act 1998, so until you produce such an agreement, you may not share my data. Any attempts to share my data without my consent will be met with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office. You may also note that sharing my data with credit reference agencies whilst an account is in dispute is contrary The Bankimg Code para. 13.6.
If you do issue a default notice against a disputed agreement or persist in sharing my data with third parties regarding a disputed agreement, I may instigate court proceedings to have the alleged agreement declared unenforceable, the default removed and the information removed from my credit file.
I would be happy for you contact me in writing with your intentions to resolve this matter, which remains a formal complaint. In the absence of a signed compliant agreement.
I would invite you to consider reducing the alleged debt to £0 and to remove any and all information regarding me or the alleged debt from your records and the records of any and all credit reference agency you may use.
Alternatively you may contact me further to agree a mutually acceptable resolution.
I would ask you to note that I will not enter into any communication regarding this matter except in writing by post and after taking advice, I am of the opinion that any continued pursuit of communication other than the manner I have respectfully requested may be in violation of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well as breaching the OFT Collection Guidelines.
To sum up, I am not obliged to make any further payments to you until you provide me with a copy of a properly executed agreement. Should you not have a properly executed agreement in relation to this alleged debt, please confirm this in writing to me. If you do have a properly executed agreement there is no reason why you should not allow me sight of it in order to resolve this dispute.
I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter and I look forward to your reply as soon as possible
I would emphasise that they use the phrase "approved limit" when the 1983 regs refer to (and arguably) require "credit limit" - the quote from HHJ Overend in the Central Trust oft842 - Calculating fair default charges in credit card contracts V Spurway [2005] CCLR,case is good - "oft842 - Calculating fair default charges in credit card contracts 24.” In my judgment, the passages of Lord Nicholls’ speech cited by Mr Say persuade me that:(a)The amount of credit must mean credit in its technical sense, and
(b)That although the use of the word “credit” is not prescribed, there should not be any confusion in the mind of the lay reader as to what the amount of credit is”.
they do quote an APR for cash advances, but its wrong. If your credit agreement is like my own, you should be looking for 4.2 in the CCA
they only refer to default charges in the T&Cs when, arguably according to the 1983 regs (specifically SI 1983/1553 - important as there are any number of Consumer Credit Act SIs 1983/155x - even one about what happens to your credit card when you die ) this should be in the CCA and not tucked away on page 6 or whatever of their T&Cs (where interestingly they repeat other prescribed terms - for instance "approved limit" gets another airing)
I would spell out why I thought the court couldnt issue an order - all the above imo, but certainly their use of "approved limit
as for them reducing the debt to £0, I feat they would saw both their legs off first, but you have to start somewhere and there is no harm in asking.
when you say "Alternatively you may contact me further to agree a mutually acceptable resolution." - I would emphasise IN WRITING, otherwise you might have them on the phone, which is best avoided. I know you said "only in writing" earlier on, but better safe than sorry.
last thing - consistent with my point 6 - they will NEVER EVER accept you are right. Even if you catch them with their hands in the cookie jar right up to their elbows, it wont be their hand. I have just fought off someone else and their solicitor's letter says "without admission of liability and purely on a commercial basis" they are abandoning the case. Translating that, it means "you have got us beat, but we wont admit it. However, we have decided not to throw more good money after bad". Realising that makes interepretation of whatever their reply is that much easier to understand.
cancelled my DD with Egg and they sent me an email asking what was going on, have sent an amended version of the above letter and an SAR, thought the charges may give me even more amo come the glorious day.
Egg-spert help needed.
card since january 2003.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by katedog
) this should be in the CCA and not tucked away on page 6 or whatever of their T&Cs (where interestingly they repeat other prescribed terms - for instance "approved limit" gets another airing)
