Rooster and Caro, I respect you but I am afraid I don't like what you have said. (To make sure this thread does not enflame views I won't post my reasons why). I will explain, working together but apart is something that can be done. CAG have projects off forum, the other smaller sites have projects off forum. There maybe some common projects that could be discussed as a united group and pushed through as such.

I think that it is about all bank charges sites working together. PC, CCS, MSE, PAG, LB, RUC, and CAG working jointly. The wealth of experience on the above sites is simply amazing and many of them are veterans of the bank charges forums.

Thames' comments are predictable; Moorcrofts' are downright breathtaking in their impudence! In your position I would wait for the 12 days +2 deadline & then send the '12 day letter' template - amend to suit: Dear Sir or Madam Request for true copy of Credit Agreement under Sections 77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 I wrote to you recently requesting a true, signed copy of any credit agreement that exists in relation to the above account. This is my right under Sections 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 on payment of the statutory fee of £1.00. This payment was included with my original request. Un

These are my views (nothing more). I would put the sentence about your being a litigant in person as the very first sentence. I would amplify the point about the failure to provide a Credit Agreement with the clauses in the CCA that have been breached. I would also submit examples of authentic Halifax stationery so the judge can compare it with that sent by 1st Credit. I would claim costs. And I would also ask the judge, at his discretion, to award exemplary costs for (a) stress, and (b) failure to provide proof that the debt is owed and is owed by you, making the whole exercise pointless. You should use the word 'vexatious' whi

Hi Firstly is it possable you could post up the following details of your case in order to advise further Claiments P.O.C (partiulars of Claim) Can I recommend not admitting any liability for the debt, partial or otherwise. If the credit agreement has not been provided by Sainsburys as the result of a CCA request, then you have no way of ascertaining if the contract is legally valid under the CCA 1974. In the absence of this information, you are unwisely, in my opinion, admitting liability for a debt, that hasn't been proven to exist or one that conforms to the requirements of the CCA 1974. You might be thinking that of co

Hi BM Ok we will need to see what Miss Booth comes back with.At least you have brought the account into dispute and have a reference number. They have 40 days as I am sure you are aware, so as Paul says the clock is ticking for their complience.I presume as per your post it went 27th June 2008.lets see what comes back and if nothing further recieved we will have to crank up the pressure. Regards Andy;)

If you are going to defend then you need to acknowledge this using the MCOL site which then gives you 30 days for to submit a holding defence again you can do this online. Your case will then be transferred to your local court and that process starts leading up to a court date which will be months away so don’t panic just yet If you defend then you need to send Sainsburys ( and/or their solicitors) this letter by recorded delivery and its best not to sign just print your name or use a signature font In the Northampton County Court XXXXXX -v- XXXXXX Claim Number:XXXXXXXXX Dear Sir/Madam REQUEST FOR INFORMATIO

Oi...cheeky! CAG is about self help, not me doing all the research myself. By making the suggestions I did, it means other users get to view my thread, and they may find other interesting nuggets whilst they are searching... But I will look, and yes, I think I am able to find the relevant threads. Mind you, my status has changed three times since the post, and I have gone under three separate names to boot...it may not be there anymore...

send them the account in dispute letter ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE Your Reference: Client reference: Dear Sir or Madam, I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to you, as it is in dispute with company and has been since date Not only is this a breach of OFT collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998 As company are now in default of my Consumer Credit Act request, Office of Fair Trading Collection Guidelines and s10 Data Protection Act request, I consider this account to be in SERIOUS DISPUTE. As you are aware while my C

Company Name Road Town City / County Postcode Re: Harassment by telephone ACCOUNT NUMBER: XXXXXXX Dear Sirs I am writing in relation to the quantity and frequency of telephone calls that I have received from your company, which I deem to be personally harassing. I have verbally requested that these stop, but I am still receiving calls. (Delete if necessary) I now require all further correspondence from your company to be made in writing only. I am of the view that your continued harassment of me by telephone puts you in breach of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Pr

Yes, you can send them a SAR. Idax

Hi Berry, I would also add you 'DOB' Jogs

That letter is the best way to go for now. A lot of the time a DCA gets a debt with nothing more than the amount and contact details for the alledged debtor. So always send the prove it letter when they start demanding money off you. It's up to them to prove you owe the money, not for you to prove you don't. Also for the DCA to back to the original creditor for more information will cost them money to get that info. If the debt is only for a small amount, they usually won't bother. They either give up, return it to the original creditor, or sell it to another DCA.

Okay for me...all other things considered...

No I am saying that they can ignore you and be in default or just send you T&C and be in default but now they will not have committed an offence after the 30 days period. In retrospect it would not really change the situation since as far as I am aware no company has ever been brought to court for the offence by the regulating authorities. I used to advise that if anyone had issued say s78 CCA 1974 request and the creditor had not complied or had supplied an unenforceable agreement that they wait the 12+2 plus the 30 days before they decided on the next step they wanted to take, now having to rethink that. I am also loo

Jaw Jaw is ALWAYS preferable to War War BB. ...No matter how far down the road to Armageddon peeps seem intent on going sometimes... May I be as bold to suggest a Thread is started either in the Campaigns Forum, or Questions & Suggestions Forum BB??... It's NOT my playground though BB ...I'm just a lickle cog in the great wheel of life I'm afraid. Perhaps late on a Friday night ISN'T the most ideal of times for peeps to start cranking the ol' grey matter. ...But then again SOMETHING has to be done/discussed/debated/agreed to disagree etc etc. Just remember the entrenched positions in N. Ireland + how far THEY moved

Does anyone think this might be a possibility. RUC peeps could, of course be included in this as well. It would be a shame to lose the expertise that existed on that site. I have some ideas if anyone would like to seriously discuss the matter. Maybe we could start a new thread. What do you think MTM ??

Hi, When the Allocation Questionnaire arrives, i would highlight the errors on the claimants POCs and ask that the case be allocated to Small claims track as they have included figures that they are not entitled to claim which has made their claim exceed the 5000 SCT limit

MTM, it's very hard to post on the main forum and responed to your posts in a way that probably won't end in another lame forum flame war. I know that the administrators of LB DON'T want such a flame war, and get really ****ed off, to be frank, when people bring up the same old same old grudges, interfering with CAG and causing more damage to both sides reputations and abilities to help people who desperatly need help. The truth is, both sides have acted badly in the past, and I've noticed sincere attempts on both sides to start building bridges. please, let us not waste that by bringing past arguments that do not help us, and do prevent

hi I think you will find that if the total claim (both capital & interest claimed) exceeds £5000, the case will be allocated to the fast track.

So RUC has tomterm8 (...I can't believe someone else types slooower than even ME...:o:lol:). A very magnanimous Post by 'Smasher' methinks, especially when one considers that links to various other websites were edited out of certain peeps Posts during the course of it's operation. To me, at least, it shows that 'Smasher', even though he/she must be personally upset, has sought to give the 'little peeps' who sought help through RUC, an unbiased + informative free choice to assist them further in the future. (...Nattie can't be registered to ALL of them surely??...:o:p) I have been saying this for aaaaages now, perhaps the time has

;)Its certainly a move in a direction I bet your old ford cant do that to well. Remember to ask for a warrant of execution afterwards.

Well its a move in the right direction Please keep us posted on any developments saint