Firstly, some while since I've been on here so apologies straightaway to Mods if I've posted in the wrond place.

In 1999 we took an unsecured loan with Nationwide for £15K. We paid approx £6K off it but then ran into major financial difficulties. The loan was eventually sold on to DCAs and did the rounds, as they do. Each time we were contacted, I sent the standard 'prove it' letter with no particular result and so it went on over the years. In early 2010 Nationwide themselves got in touch to say they wanted the loan paid off or they would take court action. I wrote several times and asked them for a copy of the original signed loan agreement. This did not appear despite a number of requests, and Nationwide were extremely vague about the whole thing. All went quiet. Then, this year, around March/April, Nationwide got back in touch again to say they wanted the loan paid off or they would take court action. I wrote again and asked for a copy of the original, signed, loan agreement.

Nationwide then wrote back to say they could no longer locate the original signed agreement, but also sent some court papers out. I went back to point out that without a signed original, in my belief, any proposed action would not stand in court (but like a fool didn't send the court docs back). Eventually, we were sent an UNSIGNED print of a loan agreement naming us and giving details of a loan. The Nationwide people stated that in their belief this represented a 'reconstitued' loan agreement and that any action would stand. Whilst I was still trying to get advice about this, Nationwide took us to court without our knowledge and obtained judgements, the details of which we received in the post yesterday.

Firstly, grateful for any views on whether printing a new loan document without our signatures can constitute an agreement. This strikes me as just 'making up' an agreement, which could be done to anyone, not just us!!

Secondly, we have never ever had a judgement made against us and I am not sure what to do next. Should I speak to Nationwide and seek a payment agreement? The court document says I have 4 days to find £9K, which just isn't going to happen!! Surely Nationwide can't just send the bailiffs in without giving us some chance to find the money? Should I try and strike a compromise deal?

Really grateful for any steers - I really feel we have been treated wrongly here and that Nationwide's action has been unethical.

Many thanks,

Norfolkboy

Firstly, you don't have to worry about the loan agreement or what they supplied (or didn't) supply.

If you never received the Court papers you can apply for a set aside, this will bring the action back to the start of the claim.

Jogs

Jogs,

Cheers - but we did receive court paperwork.....I just didn't return it because I was so convinced that a lack of an original signed agreement would nullify any action they might take. They just didn't notify us that the court action was actually happening (ie, the date/time). Where does that leave us?? Can I still apply for a set-aside?

Thanks again.

Norfolkboy

Queen's Bench Division, Manchester Mercantile Court 23 December 2009

The CMCs raised a number of different issues which were covered in the judgment, covering mostly whether copy agreement rules were satisfied in relation to credit card agreements (s.78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974). In summary, the findings were:

1. s.78 is satisfied if a reconstituted version of the agreement is provided, even where this generated using sources other than the agreement itself;
   
2. the s.78 copy must include the name and address information as per the original agreement;
   
3. the document provided under s.78 need not comply with the form of the signable agreement;
   
4. the creditor must under s.78 provide a copy of any changed terms, or a copy of the amended agreement, in addition to the terms in the original agreement;
   
5. a breach of s.78 does not on its own generate the possibility of an unfair relationship;
   
6. it is up to a court whether it makes a declaration that s.78 is breached, depending on the circumstances which it finds;
   
7. it is a matter of fact whether an agreement is complete with all its prescribed content, but is acceptable for there to be more than one sheet comprising an agreement;
   
8. those cases claiming an unfair relationship should be struck out as merely speculative. There was no evidence on which a claim could be made.