Hi there,

I've got a large debt to MBNA, for a credit card I've taken back in 2004. Balance is higher than 15K. I managed the account when the rates were around 17%, but struggled when they raised it to 34%.

I have CCA'd them in July 2010, which they have failed to comply with on time. I have eventually recieved a response, as attached. It seem to be my signature on that.

I've sent a follow-up letter about the incomplete CCA, and also a SAR request.

I have received all info as per the SAR request.

Whilst this dispute in on-going, MBNA continued to apply interest and charges on the account.

It has been few months now since my last payment.

I've informed them few times that while the account is in dispute, they cannot request any payments from me, and/or apply interest and charges to it.

Having now recieved their response, I'm not sure how to proceed..

.. The response states the Rankine case as a reference to why they have the right to continue administer the account.

Surprisingly, they also sent a DN at the same timeframe.

The DN did not give me the required 14+2 to remedy.

It was received 8 days after the date on the notice.

Link to CCA p1

Link to CCA p2

Link to DN

Can someone please review the CCA and DN, and let me know their validity?

Cheers,

NC.

Sadly its a familiar story regarding mbna. From what i have learned here on cag, the rules have changed and even if they cant come up with an agreement then they are allowed to charge interest, report to cra and default you etc. I am sure someone will be along later to advise you on the enforceability of your paperwork

By the way, welcome to the 34.9% club. Apparently when you are a good customer that is the rate you get.

Thanks. I don't think the rules have changed, but rather there is a shift in the way those are being interpreted...

no minmoo is correct

thanks to the likes in ranky etc and their pethectic attempts at avoiding debts they took out

i would not rely on and cca arguement nor any dn arguement.

as for not adding int etc etc they are only guidelines And not the rules.

you need to be looking at charges and mis-sold ppi reclaims now as your best weapon.

dx

So the rules have changed?

It is no longer the 14+2 timeframe that is required?

or is it now that the courts do not view those technicalities as sufficient cause to hold off payments?

its 12 + 2

however as said, it will matter not 'when' they produce one,

if it came be prove beyond resonable doubt that you did at one stage have a financial relationship with them

all the buff & bluster regarding the legalities of timeframes/emfoceability/invalid default notices, pretty much goes out the window.

dx

You got to admit they must be following threads on forum sites, they got the dates/time limits right, Bally Hell!

Problem is the DN was delivered on the 17th, so only 9 days to remedy...

Just so I'm clear on strategy, even if it's just a technicality, can someone confirm whether the CCA response is valid? what are the technical attributes I should be looking for when examining such a document?

Thanks!

NC.

barking up the wrong tree

what you have will be enough to make the agreement valid

it will be viewed as debt avoidance if you go down un-en route and you'll get nailed

ok the dn time frame is wrong as mbna use uk mail which takes 5 days to get into the rm system

then its deemed as 2nd class mail [you will have an S on the franking]

so it will be 4days from then too.

however, as pointed, it will be deemedthat even if you had the full 14 days, you still would not nor did make any attempts to rectify the arrears on the dn

go for charges/ppi reclaim

dx

Thanks dx100uk.

to clarify, my aim is to reverse the debt to it's state when the dispute started (July), and then make a f&f request.

I have no intention of avoiding the debt.

However, to get to that position (f&f settlement) I need to use every possible technicality to ensure they play ball.

That is why I would ask for some guidence on what is available as possible defects in the 2 documents.

I get the DN ones, as it's either about the full balance being requested

- not the case here, or the timeframe, which is evidently the route I need to use.

As for the CCA, I don't know enough from my reading on CAG, what to look for.

I'd appriciate your assistance in pointing out any technicalities which can be used.

I hope this clarifies my position.

As for charges/PPI, I plan to use that path towards the end when I get them to offer the f&f settlement.

Thanks again!

NC.

i was not indicating you were trying to avoid the debt, just that is the way a dj might well view it

pers although i suspect there should be 'more' t&c' what you have got is ok an would be enforceable.

there are some good threads about cca replied.

try using our advanced search for:

is my agreement enforecable or alike

i'd also look in this forum as there are lots of example here too

good luck

dx

no minmoo is correct

 

thanks to the likes in ranky etc and their pethectic attempts at avoiding debts they took out

 

i would not rely on and cca arguement nor any dn arguement.

 

as for not adding int etc etc they are only guidelines And not the rules.

 

you need to be looking at charges and mis-sold ppi reclaims now as your best weapon.

 

dx

Hello and sorry to gatecrash this thread, but I am interested in why the invalid DN and 'no CCA exists' (in my case confirmed by MBNA in SAR request) is worthless nowadays.

I have read other threads in the past, for both MBNA and other creditors and DCA's (hence not familiar with most recent cases) and I am in a position where I too need to be able to negotiate with DCA re: former MBNA debt, in terms of a F&F settlement. I am on IB with no other income, and I was hoping that the invalid DN and no CCA would be sufficient grounds to negotiate a good settlement figure.

Is there a case I need to look at to be more familiar with the way things have changed over the past 6 to 12 months?

Thanks, Mistaken

Hello and sorry to gatecrash this thread, but I am interested in why the invalid DN and 'no CCA exists' (in my case confirmed by MBNA in SAR request) is worthless nowadays.

 

I have read other threads in the past, for both MBNA and other creditors and DCA's (hence not familiar with most recent cases) and I am in a position where I too need to be able to negotiate with DCA re: former MBNA debt, in terms of a F&F settlement. I am on IB with no other income, and I was hoping that the invalid DN and no CCA would be sufficient grounds to negotiate a good settlement figure.

 

Is there a case I need to look at to be more familiar with the way things have changed over the past 6 to 12 months?

 

Thanks, Mistaken

 

I dont think its ''worthless'' going the CCA/DN route, just that its often badly defended in court. Many people believe defending as a litigant in person is a no-no.

There is a thread on the here where people having some success with CPUTR 2008 and well worth a read:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?291468-Fighting-back-with-CPUTR-2008....

BF

As an update,

I have now received a notification from MBNA that the account has been terminated.

The usual language about what they may do with it applies (sell it, litigation, obtain a CCJ, etc.).

It also stipulates that they have registered a default with CRAs, which cannot be cancelled or retracted.

The letter also suggests that they will listen to "reasonable" offers to settle the debt. Does anyone has any expirience with that? more importantly, would they cancel the default if we were to agree a f+f settlement?

Cheers,

NC.

what figures are we looking at in realation to PPI/Charges reclaim against the outstanding bal?

dx

Sorry to pull this thread from the archives, however The mbna 'sleeping giant' has just work up!

A quick recap - old cc, £18k debt,

last payment July 2010,

dn February 2011,

cra report shows as 'settled/satisfied.

I've not heard anything for years and have just received an assignment notice from arrow and capquest.

Can someone explain the statue-barred conditions in terms of dates?

I recall it was the date of last payment and 6 yrs beyond that the debt is closed and barred with no enforcement possible.

Is that wishful thinking?!

If it's not, what shall I do next?

Thanks,

-NC

yes its statute barred 6yrs no payment or signed letter ack'in the debt.

keep quiet let them willy wave

just means mbna have sold the debt on nothing to worry about

No payment that's for sure, letters I'm not certain as I've been in dispute with them after until the dn date. Will look for the letters to confirm...

Thanks!

NC

checked my archives and found a few letters after the dn dating all the way to Feb 2017.

I did mention "outstanding balance" in those as we were discussing the validity of the dn.

I'm not sure therefore that I can stand by the "no signed letter acknowledging the debt" criteria above,

Which means that technically there might be some more time until this gets formally SB'd in Feb 2017.

Question is - what happens until then?

Should I just ignore and hope they go away?

Surely they knew this will be difficult to collect on, right?

If so, why did they buy it?

I really thought this was done and dusted, and getting all that stress and anguish back is not what I need right now!!

doesn't matter about the letters.

you will just have been one line in a database of 10'000's of people

and the threat-o-gram machine auto spewed out a threat-o-gram that's all.

as post 17

ll the way to Feb 2017.????????????