This is what Lloyds have sent me,

clearly not the original as the font is exactly the same as on the new 1

and it looks like it was literally printed yesterday,

shocked really as I only sent the letter friday but theres a copy of this, the current terms and a statement.

Now i'm no expert but I think this is probably what they send everyone,

how do I know this is what I agreed to?.

Confusing as hell though,

"see condition 8" etc.

Clearly deliberately written with the intention of making little sense, but please can someone have a look.

Hi,

Does the paperwork have your name, address or signature anywhere on the document?

If not then they are just generic terms and conditions.

If this ever came to court and they produced the same documents with your signature on it then it would be (in my opinion) enforceable but at the moment, they haven't complied

Hi, its got my name and address printed at the top above conditions but no signature or date etc.

I believe that "agreement" is freshly printed as you so rightly think.

There are no dates to ascertain what year they belong to. (when was the original agreement started?)

Two choices. Accept what they have sent or challenge it. I would go for the latter but it's your choice

Started 1998.

Hi Craigbadger. Not sure what they have sent you but will check this tread again tonight, as I cant always see or open attachments at work. Mine was opened about 1996, and I was sent a generic set of T&C's.

Ok, well i'm going to write back asking for a copy of the original agreement anyway. I'm in a position where I have nothing to lose, considering bankruptcy so even if I get a few weeks with 1/5 less phone calls it worth while

Let me know if yours looks the same, as said ive removed my name and address from the top of page one but otherwise its completely generic.

Hi

just compared your with mine, similar typeof twaddle, but not identical. I had never actually read what they sent me but it made me laugh. Statements such as:

1. from 1st October 2008, we will not charge.... ( my account was opened in 1996)

2. The total charge for credit is shown in your original agreement

In regards to what Lloyds sent me

this is a print off of a generic agreement with my name and address printed at the top.

There is nowhere on the form a mention of the date and no signature or even a box.

Silverfox said in the thread that they had not complied but if they had a true signed copy with this information

on that it would be correctly executed but again this was not guaranteed to be the agreement I signed.

Can anyone tell me where I should go from here?.

I notice someone has recently received a copy of their Lloyds agreement

and the enclosed letter recieved was worded different to mine

but they are saying they dont need to supply anything with a signature

but surely there needs to be evidence it was the same one I agreed to?

Btw this is what they said on the letter. For some reason this just sounds iffy to the degree they dont even know my original terms.

I have enclosed with this letter

:a copy of your original agreement, which has been updated with the current financial profile of your account

:a copy of current terms/signed statement etc.

Send them this;

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

Thank you for your recent letter sent to me, the contents of which are noted. I appreciate your quick response to my original letter. However, the reply received by me does not fulfil your requirements under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

The Act demands that I be supplied with a true copy of any properly executed credit agreement that exists in relation to the above account. I may ask for this on demand providing that a fee of £1.00 is paid. This fee was sent with my original letter.

My request remains outstanding. The items you sent in your reply, does not constitute a true copy of any credit agreement that may or may not have been signed by me on the opening of this account. It neither confirms that I am liable for any alleged debt to you, nor gives me any chance to evaluate whether any original agreement was ‘properly executed’.

I still require you to send me a true copy of the original credit agreement that you allege exists. As you will know, under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a judge is not permitted to make any enforcement order unless the creditor can provide a true signed copy of the original credit agreement. This means that unless you can produce such an agreement, this alleged debt is not enforceable in law.

You had until XX/XX/2008 to provide me with the true copy I requested. You are now in default of my request. Any account I hold with you is now in legal dispute. Whilst the account remains 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, nor make any further charges to the account. Additionally, you are not entitled to register any information on this account with any credit reference agency.

To register information with a credit reference agency, you must have written consent from the customer to collate and share such information. This consent is given in the form of a signed credit agreement, so until you produce such an agreement, you may not do this.

The requirement for consent to share data is a clear requirement of the Data Protection Act 1998. any such attempts to share my data without my consent will be met with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office

To sum up, I will not be making any further payments to you until you provide me with the document I have requested. Whilst you remain in default of my request, you are not permitted to take any action against this account. This includes adding further charges and passing any information to the credit reference agencies.

Should you not have any signed credit agreement in relation to this alleged debt, please confirm this in writing to me.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully

Print name do not sign

**amend to suit your circumstances.**

Thanks, will send that off asap.

Re this: You had until XX/XX/2008 to provide me with the true copy I requested. You are now in default of my request.

They are actually still within the 14 days so should I just wait a few days before posting?was actually signed for last weds and sent last tuesday(not friday as I first thought.

You can post it after the weekend.

subbing

Hi I am now subbing,

Just starting out with these for my OH, had standard response by the looks of it so planning to put account in dispute for non-compliance.

Cerberusalert, if you are around at all, your letter in post 2 is a differently worded letter to the account in dispute letter in the library, so is it more appropriate now in view of recent test cases and what CCC's believe they can produce?

Here is my thread, any help appreciated thank you.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloyds-bank/253588-lloyds-tsb-dottys-oh.html

Hi Craigbadger,

They have just sent CCA for my oh, variation to yours.

You would have thought they would be consistent in what they are sending out to people now, although they are endeavouring to locate the copy of the original!

and no doubt they will keep on endeavouring but never find them!!! Ive been waiting a year now, sent off a SAR, they lied about never receiving it although I sent it recorded delivery so have proof. Still waiting for the outcome of an investigation by the ICO.

Hello Capricorn

Just reading yours and now subbing, see that it is going to be a battle but already fighting mine so just another added to the list!

Hi,

Regarding the letter in post 2, courtesy of Cerberusalert.

If they have said they are 'Looking' for the original, how long should you give them?

I think thats the "how long is a piece of string question",

my original photocopy turned up less than a week after the reconstitued copy which I was surprised by.

I imagine they have literally millions to hunt through so having a common name might be a good thing.

The only thing I couldnt be sure about was whether it was a photocopy of the agreement or that of a microfiche.

We could do with some undercover staff in these companies to confirm what they actually do with agreements

ie scan and destroy, archive in Britain, archive in Afghanistan or just destroy and forget about them.

I think every case is very different though.

They do not have to send you the original

Taken from the OFT's guidance on unenfroceable agreements.

2.17 The copy of the executed agreement must be a 'true copy' of the original. However, as confirmed in the recent case of Carey v HSBC Bank plc, the term 'true copy' does not mean a carbon, photocopy, microfiche copy or other exact copy of the signed credit agreement.

It is true about Carey v HSBC Bank plc but if they were to bring proceedings they could be brought to 'strict proof' and have to produce the original. Even though technically they do not have to provide an exact copy with a CCA request which includes a signature it would be difficult for them to explain to a court why they hadn't tried to prevent the need for court action if they had evidence of an enforceable agreement beforehand.

Hi Craigbadger,

Will you be posting your 'original' on here?

Yeah no problem, as requested.

This is where someone tells me its unenforceable,

i'm confident the 2 sheets match although there is nothing concrete to say that the 2 match, it does refer overleaf.

Although tbh theres so much other things I can reclaim on this account(including the ppi which I didnt even notice till receipt of this)

http://img682.imageshack.us/img682/4848/lloydscca1.jpg

http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/8054/lloydscca2.jpg

I agree Cerberusalert, the original would have to be shown upon request by the courts.

On the otherhand reference an explaination to the court they would simply say it is their right to produce a copy of an agreement under the CCA which it is and by doing so they will have fully met the conditions of a CCA request.

Then when an original was produced in court it would be put to the consumer to explain why they were trying to wriggle out of an agreement where goods/money had been received by them on a techicallity.

The only way a judge would rule an agreement unenforceable would be for clear breaches such as a wrong APR, incorrect perscribed terms breaches such as those.

People are too much relying on the fact an agreement may be incorrectly executed and really should be encouraged not to do so rather than dig a bigger hole for themselves.