Hi All, any advice that could be offered would be greatly appreciated...

I recently sent a CCA request to RBS on the 13th August with the obligatory postal order for £1. However 2 letters turned up today in the post and I feel this is a stalling tatic and a effort to obtain my signature and maybe get a little creative with the documents.

Both letters arrived today one dated the 18th August saying:

Request for copy, Credit Agreement Section 77 of CCA 1974

 

I refer to your request for a copu of your credit agreement, I would advise that the loan xxxxxxx has no loanguard cover, therefore you are not paying any insurance premiums for this loan, If you still require a copy of the Credit Agreement then please return this letter in the enclosed envelope.

 

I would also advise that we cannot accept Postal Orders

Now that one got me as to why they cant accept postal orders is it not a valid form of payment - everyone else is using it or are they just after a signed cheque?? This letter had the postal order attached.

In the second letter dated the 19th August

Request for copy, Credit Agreement under Secion 77 CCA 1974

 

I refer to previous correspondence and would be obliged if you would send a cheque for £1 n the enclosed envelope in order for the copy of the credit aggreement to be forwarded to yourself.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in this regard

Is this some stalling tatic, I still don't understand the non-acceptance of a perfectly valid form of payment.

Is anyone able to advise on a suitable response, I really don't want to send them my signature as I get the impression there up to tricks - If I do should I use a different signature to see if they do try to forge the documents and also wether this is going to start another 12 days for them to supply the information, or, will it continue from the date of the original cca request that did contain payment which they wouldn't accept.

I did have a scan of the forums and couldn't find anyone else having the issue where they wouldn't accept a postal order.

Just for info both letters appear to be signed by the same "senior business associate" and the address the letters are going back to is:

UNDA WYLIE - CDT/PPI

The Royal Bank of Scotland

Glasgow Service Centre

Tay House

300 Bath Street

Glasgow

G2 4RS

originally the letters were sent to edinburgh address for customer relations.

Thanks again for any advice that can be offered.

Gruff

I think your right, this is a new excuse by RBS to not comply, I don't believe it is a valid reason. A postal order is a valid form of payment, I would resend it, along with a letter to there Complaints dept in Telford. See what happens.

In my experience these people will lie in order to not comply.Probably the real reason they have returned it ,is because they CAN'T supply your CA.

In our case we sent postal orders to RBS, but our request was rejected because they have a ccj against us, & according to them they don't have to comply with our request,& yet I've read other threads were people have had CCJ's set aside because no CA has been supplied:confused:.

Don't assume that because this is a large bank that they will conduct themselves accordingly, I can assure you 100% they will not.

Debs

Cheers for that Debs, that is what I thought and with some answers in this pointer thread from the debt forum (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/156851-gruff-rbs-cca-request.html)

it mentions the information commisioners decision on postal orders.

I shall be preparing a letter and complaint letter saying they failed to comply with the cca request and that the date for compliance still stands from my original letter.

Thanks

Look forward to their response. Please keep us updated.

RBS excepted my postal order, but then again RBS play by their own rules, the law doesn't apply to Sir Fred and the rest of his cronies.

Paul

Just drafted my reply, think its ok, here it is for reference and I shall await there reply...

Dear RBS...

Thank you for your letters dated 18th and 19th August, the contents of which have been noted.

You denied my reasonable request to supply me a true copy of the original Consumer Credit Agreement for the above account which I requested in my letter dated the 13th August. I supplied the statutory £1.00 fee as a Postal Order which is regarded as a universally accepted form of payment.

First I’d like to ask if you could clarify which piece(s) of legislation, or law(s) in the UK where it is written that a CCA request is only acceptable when accompanied with payment by cheque.

I would further advise you that I have sought advice today from the Information Commissioners Office, with regard to the postal order you returned. Their advice is that this was a “correct” payment and therefore 12+2 days for compliance should start from the 13th August 2008 meaning you have just 2 days to comply, as of the date of this letter. They further advised should you not accept this, that I should make a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner.

As you are no doubt aware section 77(6) states:

If the creditor fails to comply with Subsection (1)

(a) He is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.

And

(b) If the default continues for one month he commits an offence.

This letter has been sent by recorded delivery, in order to avoid any further delay in this matter.

We look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully

Gruff

Deleted .. double post

The letters fine

Just drafted my reply, think its ok, here it is for reference and I shall await there reply...

 

Dear RBS...

 

Thank you for your letters dated 18th and 19th August, the contents of which have been noted.

 

You denied my reasonable request to supply me a true copy of the original Consumer Credit Agreement for the above account which I requested in my letter dated the 13th August. I supplied the statutory £1.00 fee as a Postal Order which is regarded as a universally accepted form of payment.

 

First I’d like to ask if you could clarify which piece(s) of legislation, or law(s) in the UK where it is written that a CCA request is only acceptable when accompanied with payment by cheque.

 

I would further advise you that I have sought advice today from the Information Commissioners Office, with regard to the postal order you returned. Their advice is that this was a “correct” payment and therefore 12+2 days for compliance should start from the 13th August 2008 meaning you have just 2 days to comply, as of the date of this letter. They further advised should you not accept this, that I should make a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner.

 

As you are no doubt aware section 77(6) states:

If the creditor fails to comply with Subsection (1)

 

(a) He is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.

And

(b) If the default continues for one month he commits an offence.

 

This letter has been sent by recorded delivery, in order to avoid any further delay in this matter.

 

We look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Gruff

I think this has now gone in the new regs (CPUTR?).

I think this has now gone in the new regs (CPUTR?).

Yes your correct, thanks for letting me know, I have removed that point from the letter.

Gruff

Well the time has passed and I've been eagerly awaiting there reply and this is what I got:

I refer to your correspondence dated 28 August 2008, and apologise for the delay in our response.

 

I regret to advise that the loan agreement has been misfiled and despite searching our records we have been unable to locate it. Regrettably we are unable to comply with your request made under s.77(1) of the Consumer Credit Act and return the £1 you paid. Notwithstanding this the loan agreement remains valid, and we expect you to continue to meet your obligations under the agreement. We should point out that if you do not resume making payments or cease to make future payments as they fall due we will report the default to Credit Reference Agencies ("CRA's").

 

The Bank is however able to provide a statement of financial information as at close of business 4th Sept 2008 re the loan ain this is enclosed for your attention

 

Linda Wylie[/Quote]

 

Wow a personal response this time, I am touched

 

So I guess this is what I wanted and although I think she is trying some scare tatics they are in default and the agreement is no longer enforcable, is this correct?

 

So far the account is up to date and the last payment they took would have been while they were under default, naughty naughty.

 

So next steps, cancel the direct debit I guess as I now have all the evidence for a counter claim should they try registering a default against me and send them up a follow up letter.

 

And here I come unstuck but was thinking of going the HM Treasury route and the money laundering regulations which state that they must keep hold of these documents (original or copies - which is what I wanted after all) that define an ongoing business relationship for a period of 5 years after the date of the last transaction.

 

The link to Rory's great thread is here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/93884-wescot-rbofs-oh-dear-2.html

thats shows his letter the rbos and covers this in more detail.

 

I'll post the reply to them up as soon as I've done it after throwing some ideas around the forum on the best way to play it...

 

thanks all once again for any help/advice you may be able to offer.

 

Gruff

Oh on a side note got a letter from red debt collection services today apologising for trying to get 190 pounds out of me for an account which i had to point out to them was covered under the limitation act. so happy days

"Misfiled" !!. That is a new one, I guess, a bit better than we have lost it or shredded it.

"Misfiled" !!. That is a new one, I guess, a bit better than we have lost it or shredded it.

Mine has been "misfiled" as well.

I received the application form & then advised them they still hadn't complied with my CCA.

Apparently the "Section 78 reference to "unenforceable" means we are only prevented from pursuing recovery of the debt through the courts." so they will be going to...............whistle:confused:

Well I'm thinking of sending them this to see what they say... should I add/change anything?

Account In Dispute

 

Thank you for your letter dated 4th September, however I find it difficult to believe that you have mislaid such an important document as the copy of the credit agreement.

It would appear that you gave failed in your obligations to comply with the various anti money laundering regulations in not keeping such documents. This, as I’m sure you are aware is a very serious offence.

I now require the balance of this account to be returned to zero.

Please note you may also consider this letter a statutory notice under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease and desist all future, manual and automatic processing of any data in relation to this account with immediate effect. This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies. Should you refuse to comply, you must within 14 days provide me with a detailed breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data. It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’, you must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends.

Should you fail to respond within 14 days, I will expect that this means you agree to remove all such data.

Furthermore, you should be aware that a creditor is not permitted to take any action against an account whilst it remains in dispute. The lack of a credit agreement is a very clear dispute and as such the following would apply:

• You may not demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you.
  
• You may not add any further interest or charges to the account.
  
• You may not pass the account to any third party, including but not limited to Credit Reference Agencies.
  
• You may not register any information in respect of the account with any of the credit reference agencies.
  
• You may not issue a default notice related to the account.
  

Please be aware, the CCA 1974 is very clear that a default can only be issued for breach of a valid, regulated agreement. As there is no agreement, a default cannot be lawfully issued as no valid, regulated agreement has been breached.

This will be complete defense to any court claim that is issued and any legal action you may contemplate will be both vigorously defended and contested.

I would ask that you review this account and respond favorably within 14 days of the date of this letter. Failure to do so will result in me reporting this matter to The Financial Crime Branch of HM Treasury and any other authorities as I see fit.

I look forward to your reply in due course.

Yours faithfully

[/Quote]

Hi All,

I've had a reply back from the bank now and now I'm confused as they are threatening to default me if I dont pay them, I thought they couldn't do this. How can I check if it is a valid agreement if they can't supply it.

Here is there reply:

The record keeping requirements under money laundering legislation are known to us and we satisfy them. Regrettably there are instances where, despite our best efforts, documents are msifiled and cannot be found. We have not committed an offence under money laundering legislation. You are free to raise the matter with the relevant authorities if that is your wish.

 

The only disability that we suffer from our unfortunate non-compliance with you s.77(1) request is that while we are non compliant the aggreement is not enforceable.

 

It is clear from your letter that you misunderstand the meaning of our not being able to enforce this agreement. It does not affect the validity of the agreement and it does not mean the that the agreement is void. Nor does it mean that a s.87 Default Notice we may serve on you (if you cease making payment under the agreement) would be invalid. Issuing a s.87 Default Notice is not enforcement, it is only a necessary preliminary step to be taken with a view to enforcement.

 

Even where we are unable at present to meet our obligations under s.77(1) we are entitled to take all steps short of commencing enforcement. Commencing enforcement would include bringing proceedings. However we would not take that step because the borrower could simply request a stay of proceedings until the s.77(1) information is provided.

 

The effect of a lender not being permitted to enforce a credit agreement was considered in a recent High Court case (Rankine v American Express Services Europe and others) and the judgment confirms as correct what we have described above.

 

To summarise the debt remains valid and any failure to on your part to make payment under the agreement will be reported to Credit Reference Agencies in the normal manner. If you default under the agreement, then for so long as we are unable to comply with you s. 77(1) request we will not commence legal proceedings for recovery of the debt but the debt will remain unpaid in our books until recovery becomes time-barred.

 

With regard to your Section 10 notice under the Data Protection Act 1998, our position is that the oneys you owe under the agreeement were and remain properly due and payable notwithstanding we cannot at the moment enforce the agreement if you default on your payment obligations. When you obtained the loan from us, the consent you gave at that time to the processing of your personal data covered reporting defaults to Credit Reference Agencies. Such processing of your personal data in these circumstances would be fair, lawful and warranted.

 

We woudl inform you that, given the processing of your personal data in this manner were consented to by you as part of the arrangement for lending you the money; it is not open to you to unilaterally withdraw tat consent. Accordingly, we do not accpet your notice under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act 1998 and do not intend to comply with it.

[/Quote]

 

I have no idea how to reply to this and any help is greatfully received.

Hmmm, they no they cant enforce it, but they will continue to default you for the following 6 years until such times as the debt becomes statute barred ?

They quote Rankine at you, I think that is one for pt2537. There are a couple of CAGers who have had this case presented to them and have successfully bounced it back. I will find the links for you. BRB.

Thanks citizenB, look forwad to the read

Here you go gruff. It isnt a long thread is a good read. In the first post there is a link to Dave firewalkers thread and he has his own unique way of dealing with this. It might not answer all your questions. So you might have to post questions on one of the threads.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/147432-high-court-judgement-rankines.html

I thought it was good of them to not only tell you they can't take you to court but also prepare your defence for you if they did so ! (applying for stay).

I thought the essence was that they could serve a DN because you had given them permission to do so when you signed the CCA?

If they have "misfiled" the CCA then they have also "misfiled" their data permission.

Thats what I thought as they can never prove without the agreement that permission was ever granted, same as I can't see if its is valid or invalid agreement without seeing it so therfore it must be invalid.

The record keeping requirements under money laundering legislation are known to us and we satisfy them. Regrettably there are instances where, despite our best efforts, documents are msifiled and cannot be found. We have not committed an offence under money laundering legislation.

[/Quote]

 

I was thinking about this bit earlier, and wondering that if by their own admission there never was an agreement and that way they wouldn't have committed an offence, would it stand up?

 

Also reading through the Rankines case I don't see how this applies as the abscence of the cca was regarded as supplied by the job based on their electronic records, whereas I however have them admitting to the fact they don't have it. There currently is no default on the account and its not a running credit agreement.

 

It mentions about the debtor seeking an injunction under s170 does anyone know any more about this??

hi gruff,

Check out my Halifax link from post 32 onwards. Pt has offered some advice for me which might be useful for you.

At the moment, I am going with RMW's advice whilst I investigate the other possibilities.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/136980-time-take-halifax-credit-2.html#post1720766

Hi All,

Having checked my account today it appears RBS have helped themselves to the amount of the loan direct out of my account despite having cancelled the direct debit (I know, I should have had eveything transferred over to a new bank account but thats not due to happen until the end of October) The direct debit has been reinstated - which I've now cancelled again.

Having spoken to the collections department and tried telling them the account is in dispute and that I was not making any more payments until such a time as its not they still refused to give me the money back. Also they didn't seem to know much about my ongoing dispute and even at one point said he'd never heard of the CCA let alone the points on it with regards to them being in default - thats what you get for a phonecall tho I suppose.

Are they allowed to just help themselves to money like that?? Its wound me up something cronic now having left me with no money until the end of October.

Having felt that I was going to let this slide and see what they do, I am now prepared to start taking action again but am unsure of the best way to proceed.

I'm feeling several complaints letters are in order, should I complain to

a) the bank and mention that this is a official complaint with regards to the money laundering regs, companies acts ect...

b) trading standards - they've made no contact with regards to me not making the payment.

c) financial obundasman

d) all of the above

and I guess after (a) complain to the treasury and various other departments, although unsure as to how far this will get considering the government bailout of rbs.

And would i have grounds to report this matter to the police as theft??

As always any help and advice is greatly appreciated.

Oh and on a side note should a mod see this there seems to a permissions issue on the libel thread.

Thanks

Gruff

Hi Gruff

Sounds like a bit of "offset" which they are allowed to do within the same group of companies but I think they are obliged to inform you of their actions.

If you read round CAG, both RBS & HBOS are in overdrive at the minute trying to snaffle every quid they can find as they are both heading for the buffers if you watch their share prices.

If they get much lower we could organise a CAG buyout & then shake them up.