Yes CB the Competition Commissioners Office link is very handy.

Thanks AA Therefore, I shall need to add something like the following to my big PPI hitter letter. Try this .......... I must also inform you that I was self employed at the time any PPI policy may have been presented to me. This would mean that the negative implications of having PPI, in these personal circumstances, would be a large issue herein as PPI was never explained to me by any seller. I had business insurance therefore PPI would never have been relevant to me. Moreover, I believe that on the basis that I have business insurance no claim in the PPI field would have ever been accepted by the PPI seller. This undoubtedly indicates that PPI would have been missold to me herein.

I am learning slowly. I have just found that we had some business insurance cover too over the past decade but not sure if this is apt here. We are self employed and so....... ??? It has ............ Employers Liability. Public Liability loss of income group equipment :? I am green here.. and a few other bits - any good to use as a PPI misselling hitter?? I WANT TO BLAST ALL THE SHARKS WHO HAVE TAKEN BITES OUT OF US FOR THE LAST 2 YEARS WITH THE PPI AXIS Someone spoon feed poor little Questioner........ please!!!!!!!!!! -------------- I have no legal training and the advice I offer is a matter of support. However, I can read and I can learn and I can give back as good as I get - and then some. And I really cannot stand the filthy sharks that try and make capital out of the misery of millions, consequently I am rather committed to hurting them in any small way I can. I can also say the dreaded "PPI" word

I have sent in a formal complaint and insisted they close this file. If they are not helpful PPI may be raised. I think this lot are the most confused mob I have dealt with so far.

I notice that I also cannot find any data saying that the file was sold to Cabot although they tell me that they bought it off Citi. I thought I was supposed to be told that such a file had been assigned over to a new mob? No sign of any Default Notice either from Citi - it just kinda apparently drifted from one crew to the next.

Since I last wrote on this one BOS have still not provided an agreement copy. Instead the file has been sent to Blair olly and scot, Apex and more recently Wecot. This is appalling and I have complained about their unfair actitities against me to the authorities. I shall SAR them too and the PPI issue may be the lance to prick this boil with. They are aware it is in dispute yet have sent it to 3 DCAs.

The chap in question knows full well what he has done and we have been this way before. I may go small claims on this . He is a terminal tree hater and thinks they are vermin no matter what sort they are.

I have several disputed account in which I requested CCA docs for the account number DCAs have chased for years only to receive a crappy agreement or app form that holds a differant agreement number. The banks excuse is that they simply gave an agreement copy in it 'original' form that related to the current one they are chasing..

Yeah - I know what you mean. Still back to the question in hand which is quite absurd. 1. WRONG AGREEMENT NUMBERS. 2. ISSUES ABOUT S18/MULTIPLE AGREEMENT AS WE HAVE HERE A LOAN PLUS A HUGE PPI ADDITION BANGED ONTO THE SAME SHEET. 3. NO RIGHT TO CANCEL 4. MICROFICHED SHEETS FOR A CCA REQUEST THAT ARE NOT CLEARLY LEGIBLE, OR EVEN LINKED PROPERLY BY NUMBERS. 5 ----------I FORGOT THE REST I.E. NON COMPLIANT AGREEMENT & MIS SOLD PAYMENT PROTECTION INSURANCE ALL NICELY PACKED INTO ONE PAGE All fun.......

It really makes you weep!

This is highly apt to where I want to go also:) The Consumer Forums - PPI misselling can render CCA loans unenforceable - Very significant for new CCA agreeements Possibly all the alleged debts I have hold PPI so..

So guys looking to a rose-tinted future when the sharks get the letter and say – “Ok mush, we will reluctantly pay up PPI on this disputed debt”. Then comes the tricky part, for me. You see I am better at many things than other people but when it comes to maths I am less than useless and always have been. My mind just does not work that way. I have looked at PPI calculators and spreadsheets and ran away in horror. Therefore when I have SAR material statements I will probably just tote up the PPI amounts on statements and add 8% interest - if that is correct? I will then simply say to the sharks that I have an “estimated figure” in mind after reviewing the SAR but will be welcoming their “offer for appraisal.” If is too low I shall tell them that it is. Thing is that I do not want to get into mathematical twists here as it will just confuse and put me right off. The Martin Lewis site does state that lenders will calculate the PPI amounts anyway and that doing so by us is not essential - so that is the route I shall take. I know that the maths experts of the site will probably try and advice but if so please keep it mega simple for maths thickos like me. Now whether or not the sharks also write off the doc-less alleged debts will be another thing, but one has to try eh.. Main points to sharks are – You have no acquiescent agreement with me yet you happily took PPI funds from me. Therefore the alleged agreement is worthless but you still owe me compensation, kindly pay up. and guess what - the missold PPI makes your so-called agreement even more unenforcable coz it screws with the terms and conditions which are NOT properly stated...... and then we wander off into s18 multiple agreement loan land .....oh dear..

I really think they are on thin ice though when such letters are about PPI.

I would think this is a HUGE cock up by CAPONE AND WE NEED TO FIND OTHERS WHO HAVE RECEIVED THE SAME LETTER.. THE AUTHORITIES MOST BE ALERTED SURELY

I have noticed that te letter on post 24 is a general one that others have received too. Rather iffy or what?

SO BACK IN AUGUST THEY TOLD ME THAT THE ACCOUNT WAS NOT TRACABLE HOWEVER - THEY HAVE TODAY SENT IN A NOTICE OF ARREARS WITH THE SAME ACCOUNT NUMBER ON. CONFUSING - YOU BET. I did write back but they ignored me a while back so its time to press 'em against the wall. How can any bank say one is in arrears over an account they have blatently admitted is untraceable?

Ok - maybe you will call me cruel but I would like to add a tiny extra threat on the end of this little hitter - just so they know I am not going away. Suggestions on a postcard please..

No worries here - alanalana; I think we are on a similar course here - its just that my argument is the I am owed PPI but the debt is unenforcable due to absence of CCA docs. They cocked it all up -not me..

Alan - I have added the following....... I was not informed that I could obtain cheaper alternative PPI elsewhere, if required either. This latter concern has now been the subject of an enquiry by the Competition Commissioners Office who were very critical of PPI I therefore draw your attention to the following pertinent extracts from the study entitled: “Market investigation into payment protection insurance” by the Competition Commission; dated January 29th 2009 6.162 We found that retail PPI policies were not easier to understand than other regular-premium PPI policies, and that retail PPI customers would not have a higher level of understanding or financial skill than customers of other types of PPI. Therefore, our conclusions for other forms of PPI regarding ease of using information to compare products also apply in relation to retail PPI.62 We found that the variation in terms and conditions and the way information is provided by firms mean that information is not available in a sufficiently usable format that enough consumers successfully compare products to drive competition between providers. This may restrict the ability of consumers to search effectively and to make an informed choice, and we concluded that this is a significant barrier to effective search for retail PPI, as for other forms of PPI. 5.43 A study undertaken in early 2006 by the FSA12 looked at the financial capability of consumers, including the ability to make informed choices about financial products. The FSA found that, generally, people scored poorly on their ability to choose a financial product. They often did not understand the risks they were exposing themselves to, and did not use insurance in situations where it might benefit them to do so. The FSA did find that people learnt from their experiences; in general, the more products they had bought, the better they were at making appropriate choices. Experience was in fact the strongest indicator of capability, and was far stronger than income. 5.54 c PPI policies are complex. Variations in policy terms and conditions, and hence the manner in which information is provided by firms, mean that the cost of PPI is not presented in a way that is easy to make comparisons and have a detrimental effect on consumers’ ability to understand that information. The pricing structure of single-premium PPI is an additional source of complexity in relation to PLPPI and SMPPI. The complexity of PPI policies restricts consumer search and the ability of consumers to make informed choices. In light of the above the sale of PPI was clearly unfair in the eyes of the Competition Commissioner (and other bodies). I have therefore been a victim of such unfair PPI misselling. The Competition Commissioner exhibited many more reasons in their 324 page document as to why PPI was unfair. ------- All grist to the mill. Many thanks . Q

CB - brill thanks What would you suggest for the header? I will sort this tomorrow as tea beckons now........

Best of luck My approach is simply to say Dear shark You have no enforceable agreement documentation, that I has been requesting since Kind Harold was on the throne. However, SAR data proves that you have extracted missold PPI from me. Therefore you owe me money back. Simple! I have many disputes on the go like this. I see - I think then you would be in a stalemate sitation with them hunting a loan them could never get back and you having to halt the PPI claim. Alternatively, perhaps you could then at that stage escalate your PPI complaint to the authorities if they demand you sign anything new which may be unlawful - but you would need to check that one out. To me such a move would seem to be unfair practice as you/they have no enforcable agreement BUT you can prove they have whipped the PPI from under your nose. My money would therefore be on you.

Great - many thanks. Yes, in the SAR I did ask for the demands and needs questionnaire along with other relevent material as the shark in question had sent me a general letter saying that I had requested PPI in 2001. The application form they sent me as a CCA request was however dated 2000 so... They have a bit of explaining to do. I shall treat each company differantly but the above letter which can be easily modified as a template may help others who are in a similar position to me; i.e. seeking missold PPI back whilst being careful to remind the shark that the alleged debt in not complient, due to absence of proper agreement documentation.

CB many thanks for help is much apreciated. I simply wish to have a good letter at hand for when the SARs arrive.. The PPI issue has put a new slant on events for me.

alanalana Many thanks for the kind advice which I shall study. I have studied enforcability of CCA docs for a long times and I am quite aware of what are properly executed docs not. I have several accounts that have PPI on yet no CCA docs that are enforcable. Logic dictates that I deal with both issues here although I have informed all sharks many times that they have no proper docs. I knocked up this letter to try and deal with the issues... --------- PPI RECLAMATION AND ALLEGED DEBT CLOSURE REQUEST Dear sir/madam Following advice for my consumer law expert I can make the following comments. I note that you have claimed all though this lengthy correspondence that you believe I owe you money. You have however failed to comply with my numerous reasonable and lawful requests to furnish me with a true copy of the alleged agreement that both of us would legally require for authentication in any potential litigation. Your ongoing obstructive activity herein has been noted for possible future use. However, I notice that you have been applying a substantial PPI amount each month to the statements that you have provided in response to my Subject Access Request. As you are unable to provide a compliant agreement document to prove you have a cause of action then the amount you allege I owe is almost certainly incorrect, due to a mis sold PPI. PPI was missold to me for several reasons, which include the following: ----------------- I was given no proper advice about what PPI actually meant and its implications and I felt pressurised into buying the insurance cover, believing I would not secure credit without taking on the additional and very expensive PPI. I genuinely had no idea what PPI was at the time it was added and nothing was explained to me that I could understand. In effect I was led to believe that PPI was a compulsory element herein that one had to say yes to. In fact I have serious doubts that I ever even said yes to PPI believing that any tick box on any application form may have been ticked already, prior to me seeing this. I was also partially/wholly self employed at the time and would not have required this costly PPI policy. This matter was not explained to me. It was not made understandable to me that the PPI policy was optional The implication I was given was that I was compelled to take out the PPI policy to meet the criteria for the main application so it could be processed The impression I was given by the seller was that failing to agree with PPI would invalidate the main application. I was not informed that I could obtain cheaper alternative PPI elsewhere, if required either. I have only recently discovered that I have been making PPI payments and I was unaware of what this most deceptive issue entailed The PPI is only for one account holder yet the main application is a joint one, which means that cover is only partial. This is unfair and quite worthless. All in all, the PPI policy was clearly missold to me due to me for the above reasons. The absence of a fully acquiescent executed agreement, holding the correctly prescribed terms and conditions within its four quarters means your company has visibly breached OFT regulations, via unfair collection activities, and ultimately had no legal right to charge interest or undertake any other activities that a fully complaint agreement would have permitted you to do. Such a fundamental absence of critical documentation also means that the alleged agreement is legally unenforceable as you will be fully aware. This now leaves your company in an exceedingly problematic position for you have pursued an alleged agreement knowing that the necessary legally required documentation is unavailable to enforce it. You have also added PPI which was an addition that I would never have agreed to if the matter had been properly explained to me initially. In light of the above, whilst I acknowledged no debt whatsoever to you I am advised that fair compensation is due to me for PPI that has been improperly extracted from me in this instance. I therefore include a statement (based on the Subject Access Request) of the amount that you should be compensating me with regarding PPI. Kindly note: The lack of any fully compliant executed agreement in this instance has no bearing on the amount of PPI that you have erroneously taken from me. Furthermore, such basic deficiency of requested agreement material in fact only adds to the entire unenforceability of any alleged agreement issue. This type of problem has recently been highlighted in several test cases presented in the press including one report in which a county court judge ruled “£8,000 worth of credit card debt is unrecoverable due to the ‘unfair’ way in which PPI was sold with the product. “ I am appalled by the way you have prolonged this regrettable issue. I now look forward to receiving compliance regarded the following items from you. 1)Unequivocal confirmation that the alleged agreement has been finally closed 2)Full compensation of missold PPI funds that has been wrongly extracted from me I have been prepared to pay any genuinely owed debts and this issue has never been in doubt. However, I am questioning the observance with the law as to the alleged agreement herein. I am also seriously questioning the amount your company claim that I owe and I now have evidence, via the Subject Access Request data, that the alleged and unenforceable agreement that you are trying to feign as being well-founded does in fact have a missold PPI policy attached to it. Failure to comply with my reasonable requests may force me to make complains to the relevant authorities about your gratuitous practices and unfair reluctance to comply. Kindly give this matter your due diligence and response within 14 days. ---------- I figure that there may be other issues as to why PPI was missold to me so any pointers on the above would be MUCHO appreciated.. Thanks Q

CB - I believe your advice has been wonderful so please do not have any doubts herein about me. You have helped me so much and the things you have said have been clear and logical. I CANNOT THANK YOU ENOUGH FOR YOUR AID.