Is this terrible scan enforceable? Who the hell am I dealing with here? I THINK I WILL HAVE TO WRITE TO THE FOLLOWING TWO CLOWN-LIKE FIRMS ASKING WHO ACTUALLY IS DEALING WITH THIS ALLEGED ACCOUNT. Blair olly and snot seem to have got sick of me asking for CCAs and I have just received one for an account from the Blank of Scotland (that Blair olly and snot are supposed to be managing). I know – a shared desk! It is rather hard to decipher parts of it and they write to remind me that they gave me a DN also in winter. However Blair and Olly have been happy to take the tokens since then off me. The date of this loan was 2002. Here is the Blink of Scotland CCA – they also kindly sent me a copy of the Consumer Credit Act. They state that this is a “copy of the executed agreement”. They state that this is all the info they are required to give me under section 78. They also in their letter tell me the full balance of the account. Like all other CCAs I have uploaded above it’s exceptionally difficult to read parts in it and especially the smaller print even with me specs on. They want full payment now too as they say the agreement ended which is silly as bliar olly and snot have been collecting on it since then. Is this allowed? I think its back to the “easily legible” tack unless you can spot anything else amiss in this one? Looking at this again I cannot see anywhere that it says how much the loan was for so maybe its just an application form? just looks like an application form for 2 cards or am I wrong? Confused?

I have only just noticed that back in winter I got a default notice off Crapital One bank. I was a mess at the time and had been forced to only give them tokens following advice (lol) off CAB. I have not yet asked them for a CCA so should I hunt them for one now? I am still paying them a quid a month. Just wondering if that DN affects this in any way. Seems terrible that one gets penalised and made to look bad coz one cannot afford to keep up big payments too. As I said earlier I dont think DN s bother my situation much tho as I deal mainly cash in hand .. Also asking Barclaycrud for a CCA now so it 's all fun.

dannygib Sound fabulous and I hope that OFT know all about this so that they may take their traders's licence away later on? Hard to see how they can survive, thanks to their own hostile and unprofessional activities. If they are busted it will send a big warning shot across the bows of all other DCA vultures too. I too have suffered thanks to the crudites with great "harrassment" for over a year so any tips on what to say in letters to wrong foot them would be swell. CCA attempt they sent me was a smudge of a scan yet they say its fine. It's on an earlier page on this thread. Good luck with your case.

Lex my friend, good luck to you. We are all getting there together hey, and together we all stand fast against the same foes. ;-)

Yes - quite so. They will just ignore anyone who plays that way I feel. Another thing that springs to mind is the bogus account. I was hounded by Westcoot DCA for an account that was not even mine. I could have played the cautious option and started to pay them but it later emerged that I was in the right and they knew it. My stance was strict and none compromising. Also what about others like Crudite Solutions who chased me like crazy for six months then shut the case after I asked for a CCA. I could have also taken the safe option here and paid them lots of cash too but…complains going in here too. My situation is that I have around a dozen OCs and DCA on my back. I have continued to pay some calm ones for now and not yet requested CCAs off these, and other who act in a hostile fashion I have cancelled tokens to after they have failed to provide docs that are suitable. I (uncle Fred) will possibly have the funds to easily offer F&F settlements to the evil swine within a year who CAN PROVE DEBTS/SUPPLY CORRECT DOCS, but for now I keep bouncing them back and complaining to the authorities about their aggressive, illegal and obstructive actions. This may be all wrong but you know what guys - it feels right to me and seems to work! Has done a few times already as above.

The CAB advisers and chiefs I got saddled with will be getting a formal complain when I get through all this. They were hopeless and ended up fighting with each other over me. I was in desperate ways with DCA maggots driving me crazy and they wrote saying they had closed my case. Alternatively, I am committed to telling others about CAG and how good they have been to me. I am no expert in all this but eager to learn. The different approaches of member like Lex (cautious) and DD (harder line) are good as it makes you think for yourself. DDs' excellet letter on an earlier page that asks creditors to allow one access to CCA docs at our expense is also worth keeping in mind, regrding the soft or hard way of dealing with CCA requests/killing off token payments and wouldl I feel impress any judge.

"then potentially have to work backwards and get payment plans etc agreeed if they find enforceable agreements." Lex - this is were CAB can in fact help and make DCAs accept tokens without more aggro. What I have heard on here tho is that properly executed CCA docs are a very rare item. So far all I have had from vultures has been bad copies of such things or worse. I believe a strict, adult and professional approach is a very good form of attack as advocated by DD and BB.

CAB NEAR ME WAS AS MUCH USE AS A CHOCOLATE TEA POT AND TOLD ME I WAS BETTER STICKING TO WHAT WAS SAID ON THIS SITE. CCA REQUESTS WERE SOMETHING THEY KNEW NOTHING ABOUT. THEIR SO-CALLED ADVICE INITIALLY TO ME WAS - PAY UP AND GO AWAY. THIS IS WHY I AM HERE TODAY FIGHTING MY CORNER AGAINST THE EVILS OF DCAS ! HOPE YOU HAVE MORE LUCK

“I am naturally more cautious in my approach and I try again and again and again, however I do not think you have done anything wrong as you have given them opportunity to rectify the situation. Is that about right?” My approach has always been to be more hardline . I think that paying them "gifts" as was said earlier is a big mistake. I think we agree mainly. I do remind them that they are not being reasonable - I also tell then I can pay later if they play ball but also take the stance that paying an alleged debt or one without proper docs smacked of contradiction/double standards and would not please a logical judge. And hey, so what if they find an enforceable agreement then its back to CAB for another rubber stamped financial statement that proves I can only afford a quid per month at a push. Blood out of stones and all that!!

DD SAYS "once the time is up for them to respond to cca request or they have provided an unenforceable agreement which you dispute then you can stop paying and it is not a good idea to contradict yourself by continuing to make payments towards that which you dispute" That is the line I have taken, for to pay an alleged debt that is in dispute would seem silly I feel to any logical judge and smack strongly of contridicting oneself. I cannot see logic in the reverse. You can image it ......... Judge So Mr Blogs, you say that you dispute this account due to appropriate CCA docs that have not been provided to you, yet you are still happily paying this company your money - why so? Can you not make up your mind herein? Mr Blogs Eh..... The offer to continure payments can be there when the suitable docs are provided, if at all. No one pays a debt that may be false and I have already dismissed one, which was not even mine from the Westcoot firm. To keep paying shows our logical judge that the account is not really in dispute and that the debt is still very much on. I believe they must respect such a strong stance more then hedging our bets. It is up to the creditors to prove that debt exists/enforcable docs exist, surely? Any aggression must also be show to come from them and not us. We are the victims of their abuse.

I believe that I have suffered nothing but hassassment since their first legal threat many months ago. Yes, OFT are getting plenty of feeback from me too.

I see . Would that worry the crudites much? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/195020-warning-debt-collectors-their.html I am now all for taking the fight to the enemy.

Part of me feels like writing to 1st crudités and other vultures like so. Look – I have been fairly asking you for many months to give me a properly legible copy of enforceable CCA docs and you have admitted (in writing) that you have not got anything except the terrible scan of something illegible to meet my request. I have also offered to actually pay to see the requested CCA docs that you say you do not have. In light of this please now kindly close this case as you are simply wasting your stamps in writing to me over this ludicrous matter. We both know that your asinine threats are based on hoping to drive me into giving you money. I have explained at great length many of the legal ramifications of your actions and how the authorities are currently dealing with you, behind the scenes, over my complaints. Your unwise and callous actions will I believe be the downfall of your company in the near future.I look forward to your rejoinder informing me that this long drawn out fiasco has been closed. ----------- Don’t worry, I wont send it but it makes you feel like this.

"but it does beg the question why on earth would they transcribe the info on the doc instead of just sending the agreement itself?" Yes I think DD is right about unacceptable docs. It makes little financial sense for them to drag on a case for months or longer if they have the right CCA docs to show us. DD'S LETTER ABOUT CHALLENGING THEM TO SHOW THE ENFORSABLE DOCS AT A BANK AT OUR EXPENSE PUSHES THEM INTO A CORNER TOO. They want the full amount off us and hanging on to a requested CCA doc like a terrier with a bone would be very illogical and very time consuming for them. Worst crudite for instance have told me in writing that the only have the bad scan of what I requested under s78 and nothing more, yet they still insist that they are in the sacred right to hound me. They know they are of dangerous ground with the authorities (back to Feb with OFT and my latest complaints) so pushing their luck like this would seem stupid in they really had the correct docs. Either they have long - term very cunning plans (based on not giving us the CCA docs we request) or alternativley, they are very arrogant and silly people who are relying on fear and hollow threat to gain complience . This seems to be the main debte in all this. Perhaps the truth lies in some dark middle ground they try and inhabite against us? They want our dosh as fast as possible so..?

What is gained by that course of action? Yes - this seems more logical and as Robinun Wee proved when they asked Barclaycrud for help against me and got ticked off, it seems to throw a stick into their spokes. Even if BC had the proper CCA they seemed to be telling RW to go stuff there selves as dealing with the request from me was there responsibility now and not theirs. Lessons here for us all hey. Cant wait to get the next letter off RW regarding my memo about the scribble they sent in answer to my CCA request. S'truth - didt even have my name on but was just a nasty old sludge of terms and conditions. I thiink these DCAs use our CCA documents to rest their coffee on. Perhaps that is to our best advantage and should take priority here?

Quite so - as appears to be the case in the docs I have uploaded onto this thread.

I am still getting the impression that I am best to pay the tokens to the calmer OCs, for now, and let them ship the account off to a DCA before I ask for CCAs and halt payments. I may be wrong tho?

Spark - that news about the crudites was music to my ears.

I am still paying quid tokens to a few Original creditors who dont yet hassle me. Now is it best to let this roll until they get sick of the accounts and sell them to DCAs BEFORE seeking CCAs or does it make no differance? Not sure whether to hold fire or send in CCA requests to them. Only asking as it was so comical and revealing to see RW get ticked off by Barclaycrud earlier for their ignorance over the issue. .

I almost feel mean ........ -------- Dear Sir/madam Thank you for your reply to my request under the Consumer Credit Act section 78. In your response you confirm (16/7/09) this as a true copy of the original agreement. As you must surely be aware, the poor quality documentation that you have forwarded to me does not conform to sections 60(1) and 61(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and would consequently only be enforceable by a court under s65. I cannot possibly read these two sheet copies so I obviously can’t be expected to make any educated decision as to its legitimacy. They are just a sludge that any child could have created at school and in no way honour my request for a properly executed and enforceable copy of any documentation asked for. Please note: Until such time that you provide me with correct ‘easily legible’ documents, in accordance with the cancellation notices and copies of documentation regulations 1983(2), you will remain in default and may not make charges or interest to the alleged account, may not enforce it or refer it to third parties and may not place adverse information with any third party about the account. Consequentially, any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS. I note however that although this account is clearly in dispute you have demanded payment from me (“within 10 days.”) This demand in itself is a breach of regulations that I shall make reference to at a later date and possibly use in a formal complaint against your company if necessary, dependant on your next actions against me! I must reiterate that, after harrying me for many months, CXXXX SXXXXs closed this alleged account, presumably for wise and financially logical reasons. I would politely suggest that you do the same, before your company breaches any additional guidelines that I will report to the governing bodies. The copy letter of advice from your client is highly questionable to say the least, yet I shall also be delighted to use this in future also if needs be. I politely urge you to follow the same rational route as CXXX SXXX and close this unfortunate issue immediately It has been in dispute for some time (with your failure to honour ny CCA request, s78) and clearly still is.

Oooooooohh - naughty but nice Ok will do

so just shortie saying IN DISPUte due to illegable mess posing as CCA ? Cruel to prod them with more ?

yep - and I think they will regret letteing the cat out of the bag by sending me the bollocking memo off BC too they tell me a lot about why CS shut the accout. RW must be thick to take it on or is all this just a cunning plan to get me fluffed? are they bright enough to craft up that? Now should I be just giving then the you have not honoured my CCA spin or threatening them with MORE in light of how this case is in disute and has been since Crudite S shut it?

my thoughts too so are they saying CCAs dont have to have our names on ? must be wrong surely thats not a proper CCA copy It looks like BC have alreday told CS to get stuffed (CS closed the account) and they in turn palmed this one off onto RW who are getting the same bog off treatment from BC now. RW say I have to pay them in 10 days. Now come on - this mess aint even got my name on it. I could relate to ANYONE.

Rw have been sitting on this letter from BC since May Any wonder Crudite S got shut of it?