Thread: Re: Tony3x -v- Goldfish a/c

There are 3 BC accts.

1 always BC
1 originally Goldfish
1 originally MSDW

Can you start a thread for the MSDW maybe as BC ex MSDW.
I will work out which one is ex Goldfish and maybe you can do the same for that.

thanks

Hi Tony,

Goldfish thread ready for use.

Account in dispute letter.

Then complaint to the fos when you have BC's Final Response.

Hi Tony,

If this is the response from BC after fos intervention, I'd be inclined to only make small monthly token or stop paying.

Alternatively, write to BC saying you assume they have no enforceable agreement for this account and would they consider accepting a F&F settlement of £xxx and the removal of all adverse credit reference entries for the a/c.

What do you want to do with this?

Hi Tony,

BC are usually slow to sell on debts and tend to keep it in-house using Mercers and Calders to chase the a/c. Here's a possible response to the T&C's that they sent you. As always, adapt as necessary:-

Dear sir or madam,

Account Number: xxxx xxxx xxxx

I refer to your reply dated xxdate which you have sent in reply to my request under section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

You have replied to the above by sending a copy of your companies current terms and conditions. I must inform you that this is not sufficient to comply with the request and that your company is still in default under the act.

To clarify, just sending the terms and conditions is a breach of the Act and Regulations as, apart from the information that the Regulations provide that you may exclude, the copy must be a "true copy" of the agreement.

This breach of the agreement can be demonstrated as follows;

As you will know section 180(1) (b) authorises, "the omission from a copy of certain material from the original, or the inclusion of certain material in condensed form." This refers to statutory instruments made under the heading Copies of document regulations and in this care in particular to SI 1983/1557.

Before leaving section 180 there are two other sections that should be remembered these are:

Section 2(2) (a) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not satisfied unless the copy supplied is in the prescribed form and conforms to the prescribed requirements;

And more importantly

Section 2(b) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not infringed by the omission of any material, or its inclusion in condensed form, if that is authorised by regulations.

You will see that this quite clearly states that whilst certain items may be left out of the copy document the rest of the document must be in the form and contain all items as prescribed by the regulations.

Turning to the regulations regarding what may be omitted from these copies these are contained with SI 1983/1557.

The regulations state:
(2) There may be omitted from any such copy-
(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instrument or other document relating to the debtor, hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;
(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancellable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of signature by the debtor of an agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

It is quite clear what can be omitted from the copy document, this again asserts that all other details of the agreement should presented in form and content as required by the regulations.

The requirements of the Agreement regulations 1983/1553 are very explicit in describing the form and content of an agreement and this as I have demonstrated also applies to the copy of any such agreement with the above mentioned proviso.

Nowhere within these regulations does it state that part of the agreement can be presented on a separate document headed terms and conditions.
It does state that all terms and conditions should be within the agreement document and is explicit of the form in which it is presented.

I hope this explains why your reply was unacceptable. I await a True copy of my agreement and would remind you again that, whilst the request has not been complied with, the default continues.

If you fail to provide the necessary document within 14 days, a formal complaint will be sent to the fos for investigation.

Yours faithfully

Hi Tony,

Can you confirm, are they demanding the full a/c balance or just payment arrears.

You could ignore the letters from Mercers or CSL.

Or you could write to CSL asking why they are demanding the full balance when you have received no notice of assignment, nor a copy of the credit agreement which you have asked for from BC.

And tell them to back off as the a/c is in dispute, or you'll report them to the fos for breach of the OFT debt collection Guidelines.

Yes, I noticed that too.

If you do write to CSL, you could mention it but I doubt it'll have any useful effect for you just now.

Blimey Tony,

A DCA has actually responded individually to the letter you sent. Must be a first.

Any word yet from the fos.

If you reply to CSL with the FOS ref. no., tell them they must withhold all collection activity until the FOS has finished it's investigation, or you'll report CSL for breach of OFT DC Guidelines.