Good afternoon folks....

Upon request, I have started this thread for questions/advice re. CPUTR because my last thread had grown too long for people to find relevant information. I have gone through all postings on the other thread and noted the ones to keep and the ones to be removed/hidden and once this list has been emailed over to CitizenB.... (later today, I hope) it should then be far easier for people to follow the original CPUTR thread. If not, any questions can be asked here.

For reference, the original thread is now a "sticky" and the link is below :

Fighting back with CPUTR 2008....

I am now shattered and off for a lie-down !!...

Thank you for your work, good job you have a week to recover:-) CPUTR is often overlooked and anything that brings it to people's attention is excellent.

Excellent, Thank you:!:

Yes its a good effort.

It is well worth printing a copy off for reading-although it does go into many pages.

There will be far fewer pages once the editing has been done....

Have to say that a lot of people, (inc me) will appreciate you efforts on this, now and in the future - excellent stuff

David

Original thread;

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

I know this is in danger of becoming a P1 tribute thread, so maybe I could get it back to questions and answers by saying a final thank you on behalf of everyone on CAG - you really have done an incredible job which is much appreciated by ALL of us. You are an absolute star!

And so on to questions..............

OMG... no tributes please.... I ain't dead yet ..... although if Brian Carter has his way, I might be soon....

This particular account is still with the OC but has been through 3 DCAs and one solicitor already...... so let's see how he responds to a request under CPUTR. I've heard that Mr Carter tends to issue court papers like confetti.... but will he still pursue it?

Place your bets now.... ! 8-)

PO 1 Carter O:madgrin:

Yes its a good effort.

It is well worth printing a copy off for reading-although it does go into many pages.

There will be far fewer pages once the editing has been done....

Other thread fully edited. Well done P1 for sticking with it

Your link in the first post was broken, I have mended it for you.

PER ADUA AD ASTRA may the stars of CAG prosper:yo:

Thanks P1...

But correct me if i am wrong here....is the OTHER main thread purely for factual experiences...and THIS one for Q and A's??????????????????????? s'pose this is the 1st question:-)

rgds

m2ae

Thanks for all your help CB....

Yes, M2ME.... the main thread is for people wanting to familiarise themselves with CPUTR and what can be achieved. It just got too huge for people to plough through and it was suggested to edit it down... before it got as long as my "Manchester" thread...

This one is for questions/advice.... but if we need to direct people to the first thread, they'll be able to get the gist of what it's all about from that and if there are any post-request experiences/responses to add to that thread, we still can.... without clogging it up.

Good on yer P1.

I'm sure there'll be questions soon enough on zis thread...

If I need to use CPUTR2008 at some stage,will the fact that I have sent an I & E to some DCA's in the past be in some way an admission of debt and take away the very power of CPUTR 2008.

I have read through the threads re CPUTR but could not find an answer to this.

Please advise.

Thanks

If I need to use CPUTR2008 at some stage,will the fact that I have sent an I & E to some DCA's in the past be in some way an admission of debt and take away the very power of CPUTR 2008.

I have read through the threads re CPUTR but could not find an answer to this.

Please advise.

Thanks

IMO, no. CPUTR is used for clarification; to see where you stand based upon what they're threatening to do to you at the time. A lot of the time, it means that we have to read between the lines because companies seem reluctant to say one way or the other if they don't have relevant documents, etc. Having said that, some have just written back and said that they are no longer handling the account.... leaving you to draw your own conclusions.

Sending an IE sheet is attempting to co-operate. Responding to a request under CPUTR is asking them to co-operate back.... that's all.

Thanks P1

Thats clear.

I'm sure I will have more questions as and when the need arises.Its really great to have such a thread as this.

Thank you.

HI

Yes there is a lot of information on the thread. I haven't really looked into this much so forgive me if this has been gone ove before.

Regarding the practical use of the legislation, i notice that several posts mention "Criminal sanctions" for breach of the act. Could you elaberate for me, are these sanctions itemised within the act itself, and who can set off the enforcement proccess, the cosumer, the oft?.

Also do these breaches have to be indemic( ie. something that effects many consumers) or can it be an individual act against an individual consumer?

Peter

Peter

HI

Ok Just read some of the act, OFT and Enterprise act, i see.

The act does seem to continually refer to "commertial practice" though this would seem to me to indicate that the regulation was intended for commertial breaches rather than individual ones, looking at the actions that have been taken using these regs, they same to confirm this.

Advertising problems, misseading claims, not seen anything yet that would show how this would aid an individual who is trying to get a copy document for instance, there is no sanction regarding enforceability available for any breach.

Would you not have to show that any breach was systemic in order to get an enforcement? Would it be likely that a creditor would have a system in place that issued incorrect copies. I mearly seek clarification.

Peter

Hi Peter...

The only case so far that i am aware of in intepreting this Regulation was this year in the High Court

OFT v Purely Creative Ltd...although not in context of Consumer credit Agreements it nonetheless clarifies terms such as 'average consumer,'transactional decisions,''misleading actions/omissions' .....

There is also an OFT CPUTR 2008 Guide published by OFT I cannot remeber what coed it is for now but I am sure that someone vwill help

http://www.oft.gov.uk/business-advice/treating-customers-fairly/protection

Is that what you are after?

Hi

Yes i have a copy of the regs, i was just after some examples of how it is enforced. I fo9und some here

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mablaw.com%2Ftag%2Fcputr%2F&ei=5i3lTZrRPMW28QPet_yIBw&usg=AFQjCNEvm14NPLVnJUggLFhxaVPnXI9fYw

THey all seem to be concerned with the breach of a companies requirements to comply with a general provision, if you see what i mean. I was looking for something that showed these regs can be used on an individual complaint.

I noticed the letter on the other thread that referd to the regulation being used to compel creditors to only say they can send a true copy, if the orriginal executed agreement was available.(otherwise they would breach section 5 of the reg)

This is interesting, i just wonder if it appropriate to use it in a one off situation, looking at the regulations it seems to me that the requirement would have to be made on the finding that the company issued copies in this manor on a regular basis, or that this was a systemic breach.

Peter

Haven't you questioned this on another thread Peter?

Although I can't remember which one or what the response was!

Haven't you questioned this on another thread Peter?

 

Although I can't remember which one or what the response was!

Hi no not looked at this regulation before. But it is quite a fundemental point and is similar in this respect to the enterprise act i think. If you have discussed this before i would appretiate the link.

Peter