Andbrat - Reading your thread there, it seems LTSB are pulling credit card account agreements out of thin air when they can't find the agreements to actual accounts. My thread 'Unauthorised consolidation of loan and overdraft' has more about that.

Anyone able to advise on the set aside for Morph? I've had no experience with set asides myself.

I'm not quite sure what the set aside deadlines. As regards the court papers, were they sent at least by recorded delivery? If not, they certainly should have been.

I think probably the funniest thing with the paperwork he got the other day is that it came with a really stroppy letter saying essentially 'we will not correspond any further regarding this matter and believe the account is fully enforceable'. Oh really? Shame the CCA account was sent in enquiry to a non existent account, and the 'agreement' that came has an entirely different account number on that is ALSO non-existent. LTSB really crack me up

With all due respect to noomill060 and 73north - you're both going round in circles.

This just gets better and better. In respect to this previously unseen CC agreement that LTSB did send, LTSB stated in writing a few months before now that the two accounts were consolidated into one - and the account number they've cited in that letter is different again. So, it seems LTSB have worked themselves into a tizz :- 1) We have an unlawfully terminated loan and overdraft (invalid default notices issued for both prior to termination). Two terminations performed whilst a request for refund of unlawful charges was being pursued. 2) The two terminated accounts consolidated into a new account for which no agreement exists at all. 3) Now, a CC agreement turns up that the customer has no prior knowledge of ever signing. 4) So, there are four different account numbers, when the customer had ever been in possession of and has only ever used, two of them. The guy concerned posted his frustrations in an audio clip on YT, which is worth a listen for anyone who's had problems with LTSB. What's said then is even more confused now.

Well, here's a development. CCA received - but for his respective loan and current accounts. It's for a Credit Card. It's certainly an account that's never been used, and one that he has doubt he ever agreed to at all. It has his signature on it, but he can't remember signing for it at all, and all other personal detail sections has been completed by someone else, and he suspects at least two other people. There's even a credit card statement enclosed, which shows nil balances all the way. This might get deeper yet. The copy of the agreement in question will be scanned up in due course to determine enforceability, but a quick glance doubts that it is. The agreement is dated the same day as the loan, and what is very telling as that the only agreement papers he was given at the time were that of the loan.

Exactly. Parrots are intelligent and highly social creatures. How dare you insult the good name of parrots!

AIC can't get 1 right! As in '£1 statutory fee'.

Wouldn't they better off learning the alphabet first and the significance of the letter 'A'. Start from the basics. As in 'CCA - What it is and what it means to you!'.

AIC pull this s**t ALL the time with CCA requests. Especially with Lloyds accounts. I still wonder how they haven't been pulled by the OFT on this! In my case, they admitted on the phone to getting my request and payment. Wonders of Truecall means I have all this on tape. The accounts been with two other DCAs since, who were both told to sling their hook. One of them asked me to send a copy of my letter. I told her I'd only do that in court. Haven't heard back since.

If the 2nd DCA asks you to forward a copy of the CCA you sent to Moorcrap, don't. The dispute letter is all you need to send, and as far as the 2nd DCA is concerned, that's as much as they need to know and all you need to tell them.

Whenever anyone engages in conversation with MH staff members, the word 'sugar' must be mentioned at the end of every sentence you say.

Don't bother trying to contact them. And if a CCA has been sent and you've got proof of post, you need do nothing else - even if another agency (probably Meritforce) calls about the same thing. I've never known MH to fulfil a CCA request, ever. Depending on where the 'debt' is from, they don't bother to refer the request to client. Contrary to law, I know, but that's their routine practice.

I know the 'credit' industry are getting desperate, but this is a new low. Basically, it's 'jump to our tune or we'll flood the legal system'. In other words, emotional blackmail. I don't think the legal system will look kindly on this at all, and it could well do the opposite of what the industry would like.

Hi joolzy. Add to my previous note, that if you have proof of postage/proof of cashing of CCA request, then you need to do NOTHING else. After a while, AIC will give in (they WILL attempt to deduct that pound from the debt balance), it'll go to client, and then to other DCAs. When it does, refer them to the request from AIC, and that the client should have obtained this request from AIC by now. No, AIC will not have passed your request to the client as the law prescribes. If other DCAs ask to you to forward a copy of the CCA request sent to AIC onto them, refuse point-blank. AIC know the law, what they're required to do, and if they haven't, then that's not your problem. Formal complaints should of course be made - to all parties concerned (FOS, OFT, etc).

No, you wouldn't have to send another request if you've got proof they got the first one. AIC try to be sneaky and will no doubt try to offset the £1 against the debt. I speak from personal experience as regards AIC. If they've got the request, then it'll stay in default until (or IF) it gets fulfilled.

[problem] or **** - its all the same to me, really. Intrum Justitia was renamed on a previous thread as 'Into Jobcentre' - thats the best, and most appropriate so far. But any company with the word 'credit' in has to be some kind of sick joke. There is NOTHING within these companies that warrants credit.

No. I'M Spartacus! And Kirk Douglas' son...

Shame we don't see this happen here more often :- InsideARM: NY Attorney General Shuts Down Collection Agencies; Subpoenas 20 Others

If 1st Credit are so passionate about Latin, Swearsaurus Multilingual Swearing: How to insult, swear, cuss, and curse in 184 languages! offers a few. A few choice Latin phrases here that I'm sure will keep them occupied for a while.

Intrum Justitia? Sounds like some South American secret police force. But, even those powers IJ do not have. If their downward turn continues, they won't have false or even imaginary powers. Here's hoping...

Solicitors? Rest easy, suepoo85 - MH aren't even capable of soliciting prostitution. They have no hold over you whatsoever, you're not obliged to interact with them in any way, and the advice you've been given up to now is sound and correct. MH are skating on very thin ice at the moment, so an OFT complaint would be advisable.

Is this all they sent? For one, it's barely legible.

Gets to something when the monkeys have to call in an adult to hang up the phone properly. Yep, I'm very impressed with the professionalism continually demonstrated by the credit industry...