alleged "cut and pasted" docs

[sussex1]

Hi

 

i have eferred to this application form sent to me by Goldfish in a different thread

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm223/sussex1/goldfishapplication.jpg

 

it relates to a Morgan stanley card I took out in 2001 and they are no passing it off as a valid CCA.

 

I think this has been cut and pasted to lok like something it isn't as he Goldfish logo at the top and Barclys details at the bottom would not have been there at that time.

 

I'm about to reply to them repeating that this isn't enforceable but wonder whether I should mention this aspect as well. If so what do i say?

 

Any ideas?

 

thanks

[fuzzybobble]

That is laughably bad cut and paste job if I ever saw one.

 

I love how someone has written "This is a copy of the orginal agreement" at the top of the page. :lol:

 

Write and inform them of this. Also mention that forging of legal documents is also fadulent and that you'll be reporting them to the FOS.

[Guest forgottenone]

Having same trouble myself. Similar, but different discrepencies. No wish to hijack, but your's is a cut/paste like my own ... So it is okay then to say 'this is a forgery' or words to that affect? Then report them.

[creditcardmug]

Hi ive got two of these from them as well, and ive seen numorous examples on here as well, its all total rubbish, ive taken them to task over this and they arent interested. My two are now with cabot who say they are not obliged to supply me with anything regards my CCA request.

They simply do not have the "agreements" and resort to making things up in an attempt to hoodwink the debtor.

In the case of old M/S cards theres even less chance of them having anything

[yourbank]

is it all Goldfish?

[creditcardmug]

is it all Goldfish?

 

 

Goldfish bought morgan stanley, then barclays bought goldfish, all in the last couple of years, so now barclays own the lot, and cant find anything regards "agreements"

[yourbank]

Was asking because there maybe a pattern with a specific provider, ie linked companies Goldfish and morgan stanley.

Sometimes, small things that you pick up could be the tip of the iceberg.

[B3rty]

They have obviously printed out the copied document on Goldfish headed paper....I have one of these as well with the same hand written comment along the top, which is great because it means they can't produce anything else to replace this.

[steven4064]

I should point out that, in response to a request under s78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, companies can send 'reconstructed' documents. Getting them enforced by a court, however, is a completely different matter.

 

To get an agreement enforced by a court, s127(3) of the CCA is clear - it must be a document signed by the debtor and having within itself the prescribed terms. An original must be produced in court to comply with paragraph 7.3 of Practice Direction 16 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

[TheChancellor]

That is laughably bad cut and paste job if I ever saw one.

 

I love how someone has written "This is a copy of the orginal agreement" at the top of the page. :lol:

 

Write and inform them of this. Also mention that forging of legal documents is also fadulent and that you'll be reporting them to the FOS.

 

Hi everyone - excuse my ignorance but how can you tell?

 

What should it look like or is it simply that they wont have one?

 

I'm literally just going out of the door to post my CCA letter to Goldfish & will compare notes when received.

 

ps how do I find the Welcome page to say hello properly.

 

Tx TheChancellor

[Mr lex]

Hi Chancellor,

 

Come and say 'Hello' here :-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/

 

There is a lot of information on 'Goldfish' here :-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions/

 

Look forward to seeing you about.

 

Lex

[sussex1]

thanks for all the reples, i have sent them (again) a letter confriming it doesn't comply and pointing out why. i have also invited their commens as to how the application form is on goldfish headed paper seeing as it is not a goldifsh card.

 

i'll be very surprised if they do not know simply sell this account

[fuzzybobble]

Hi everyone - excuse my ignorance but how can you tell?

 

What should it look like or is it simply that they wont have one?

 

I'm literally just going out of the door to post my CCA letter to Goldfish & will compare notes when received.

 

ps how do I find the Welcome page to say hello properly.

 

Tx TheChancellor

 

It's easy. Look at the alignment of the text of the logo compared to the main body of the document. It's different, as is the bottom part. 3 bits photocopied badly together to look like one document. Anyway it's unenforceable as it doesn't contain the perscribed terms on the signature document.

[Enron]

Very interesting read, book marked this.

 

I've got dubious CCA documents provided by RBS.... so it looks like manufacturing documents is not a limited practice.

[Guest forgottenone]

It's easy. Look at the alignment of the text of the logo compared to the main body of the document. It's different, as is the bottom part. 3 bits photocopied badly together to look like one document. Anyway it's unenforceable as it doesn't contain the perscribed terms on the signature document.

 

Or, in my case, the different handwriting as a dead giveaway ...

[fuzzybobble]

I'm still trying to work out why they would spend the time reconstructing an application form that's unenforceable anyway?

 

It really does amaze me sometimes how thick these people really are. No wonder they have to work for DCA's. They probably failed their Woolworths exams.

[Guest forgottenone]

I'm still trying to work out why they would spend the time reconstructing an application form that's unenforceable anyway?

 

Cos they think we are all muppets? Think they can get away with it ... we are the big creditor ... do what we like ... who is gonna believe anyone who owes us money if they complain we've sent something illegally created?

[creditcardmug]

I'm still trying to work out why they would spend the time reconstructing an application form that's unenforceable anyway?

 

It really does amaze me sometimes how thick these people really are. No wonder they have to work for DCA's. They probably failed their Woolworths exams.

 

If they can make you believe its enforcable then they think you will resume paying them, or if a court case ensues you wont contest it, i think thats the way their tiny minds work IMO

[NitrousOxide]

I should point out that, in response to a request under s78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, companies can send 'reconstructed' documents. Getting them enforced by a court, however, is a completely different matter.

 

To get an agreement enforced by a court, s127(3) of the CCA is clear - it must be a document signed by the debtor and having within itself the prescribed terms. An original must be produced in court to comply with paragraph 7.3 of Practice Direction 16 of the Civil Procedure Rules.

I agree with this, sound advice.

They can reconstruct one to satisfy the CCA but will have to produce the original in court.