mr.ton, it's not a credit file it's a debt file and I want no more to do with debt cards, debt crunch, debt files etc. I have learned to live within my means and it's a blast. Dogs

Morning palomino, I think sucker said as much in the first post. Dogs

Evening I would follow the advice above and contact Northampton on Monday to check the validity of the content of the letter. Let us know what you find and get back to us. Dogs

bump

Monx & smt It's counter-intuitive not to ask for costs, you have been placed in this position by the DCAs and have been forced to respond and take time to defend yourself. Make them pay, and good luck. Dogs

Good luck un1 everything is crossed for you. Dogs

You're not wrong europa, the Rankines judgment was flawed and the Wilson rulings still stand

good for you

Good for you, I would relish a progress report. Dogs

I’m not absolutely sure about an order of service with reference to defaults and statutory demands. I THINK that a statutory demand can be issued at any time as it’s just a case of sending the creditor the form, no solicitor needed, so it’s a cheap thing to do and often scares the debtor into paying up, hence its growing popularity. The creditor needs to be able to prove service so if it has come to you by first or second class post it’s unlikely that they will follow through with it, because it is a very expensive process to pursue. They are fairly easy to have set aside and you have 18 days in which to do this and it would be prudent to get this done. There are a number of threads on the forum that will take you through the process of having it set aside. If you can’t find one I’ll look in tomorrow evening and point you in the right direction. Dogs

Hi again, thought it might be CapQuest, they seem to be sending these out by the bucketful. How did the SD arrive? First class, second class, recorded or process served?

I’m ambiguous; I know that several members of CAG feel that when the money has been borrowed, and spent, then the debtor has a moral responsibility to repay and I guess I understand that point of view. My position makes it difficult for me to apply that moral stance, I have been plunged into debt through little fault of my own and when I signed the agreements I was confident I would make the payments and, for many years I did that with no difficulty and so I can say that I had no intention of avoiding paying my debt. I’m not sure that matters to anyone but me but that’s the position. It’s a mistake, I think, to equate morals with the law. As far as I understand it the consumer credit act 1974 had certain provision deliberately included to protect the consumer. These stipulated the way in which agreements were constructed and the way, and form, in which a creditor approached the act of enforcing repayment. Given that this contract is between the creditor and the consumer it is madness that one party has, in many cases, just not bothered to comply with the statutory instrument, it’s not rocket science after all, get the form right, issue defaults and notices of assignment correctly, keep copies of everything and it’s more or less in the bag. The fact that they failed so to do is a sign of arrogance and high-handedness. I will do anything, within the law, to protect my home and my family, my creditors will do anything within the law to try and recover their money. Morals are no longer an issue here. Dogs

Thanks FF I've got 3 to get removed. Dogs

Evening smt37 Who is the DCA? Dogs

Evening 29. Just wait now to see how they respond, you can begin to compile a file of all the paperwork, put it in chronological order and keep a note of the date items were received (stapling the envelop to the letter is a good idea)and, of course, keep proof of posting. Have you received a default notice from RBoS or a notice of assignment? Try not to talk to them or they might try to bully you and don’t sign any letters that you send to them. Dogs

Thanks Blind If I don't respond then Ill just get judgment by default, it's worth a punt, I think, and their default notices and NoAs are up the spout with me. Dogs

Evening Blind, I have a CA sent by Aktiv Kapital regarding a B&Q card also issued by GE money with the section 11 quote in the signature box. I'm going to hang on to your coat-tails here and pinch all your stuff, if that's OK? Dogs

Na, no scrap here I'm £6,550 less poor today. I might get you when you're not looking though. Dogs

Evening Alf, I think the fact that you’re using words like “I think I can make out” is my point entirely. Unless the form has lettering that is easily legible and of a colour which is readily distinguishable from the background medium upon which the information is displayed it fails to comply with regulation 2(1) of Statutory instrument Consumer Credit cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1557) and this, in and of itself, makes it unenforceable. Surley it’s worth asking them to produce a legable document? Dogs

Here is a template letter you can send: Your Name Address DCA Name Address Account details I require you to supply the following documentation before I will correspond further on this matter You must supply me with a true, executed copy of any alleged agreement and I enclose the statutory fee of £1.00 (use a postal order). Please note that this is not a payment made against any alleged debt and may not be used for this purpose. This is my right under your obligation to supply a copy of the agreement under the legislation contained within s.77 (1) and s.78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 - your obligation also extends to providing a statement of account. You are notified that you are obliged to supply these documents, whether you are the original creditor or not under S189 of the CCA 1974. Non-compliance with my request is an offence under the above Act and will result in a report being submitted to the relevant statutory authorities. Take note at this stage, that any legal action you may contemplate will be both vigorously defended and contested. Yours faithfully Your Name See how they respond. Dogs

Asbestos underwear not required, just back from court having had a CCJ set aside, £6500.00, so I’m a happy chicken. I do have chickens, 14 at the last count; I got them from a local battery farm just before they went off to Knorr to be made into cubes. They scratch a living around and about and I feed them on food scraps and the occasional handful of mixed corn and I get, on average, 6 eggs a day. They’re good quality and very cheap so there can be a middle way you just need a little confidence and a little knowledge and there you go. You’re correct, of course, you get what you pay for, and that’s true of all kinds of services, medicine, education, transport and eggs. I’m not naive but when the service is dramatically skewed towards the claimants as it is in these cases I find it unsavoury. Money Claim on Line was not set up for the defendants benefit I’m sure and, as I understand it, the CCA was constructed in the way it is to help correct the inbalance. Anyway, I’m new to this and I do value your experience and input. Best wishes, Dogs

Thanks for the clarification; I’m always concerned about giving duff advice. For further clarification, the fact that you head the CCA request with the statement “I do not acknowledge any debt to your client” does not put the account into dispute then? Dogs

Morning Alf, I've used this a couple of times and it has stoped them in their tracks; I found the form supplied was entirely illegible and therefore did not comply with regulation 2(1) of Statutory instrument 1557 which states: Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1557) 2 Legibility of notices and copy documents and wording of prescribed Forms (1) The lettering in every notice in a Form prescribed by these Regulations and in every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act shall, apart from any signature, be easily legible and of a colour which is readily distinguishable from the (2) The wording of any Form prescribed by these Regulations shall be reproduced in copies of unexecuted or executed agreements or in Notices of Cancellation Rights sent [by an appropriate method] under section 64(1)(b) or (2) of the Act without any alteration or addition, except that-- (a) the creditor or owner may enter the name and address of the debtor or hirer in any Cancellation Form prescribed by these Regulations; and (b) every Form shall be completed in accordance with any footnote. (3) Any such footnote shall not be treated as part of any Form prescribed by these Regulations and may be reproduced in addition to any such Form (4) Where any such footnote requires any words to be omitted, those words shall be omitted or deleted. Therefore I aver that (DCA NAME) has failed to discharge their obligations under section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and as a result are not entitled by way of section 78 (6) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 to enforce this agreement while their non compliance continue. Try that and see what happens, and from what I can see it doesn't seem to have the prescribed terms anyway. Dogs

It's nearly one in the morning DDD, you should be in bed Sounds like you're getting there, good for you. Dogs

I know what you mean, I’m being pestered by Link and I’m being spoken to be people who can hardly construct a sentence. I suppose that it’s not surprising, the old adage of paying peanuts and getting monkeys springs to mind. I used to play with them, you know: 10D “whose security are we talking about?” DCA“yours sir” 10D “so, let me get this straight, you want me to give out personal information to a complete stranger who has called me out of the blue and this is for my security?” DCA “err, yes” 10D “are you completely insane?” but I can’t be bothered anymore. It’s obvious that they have been whipped up into a moral fury and told that we are a bunch of degenerate debt dodgers responsible for the credit crunch and their siblings arrested development and that we lie and cheat and have no reason to expect politeness or understanding. What worries me most is the imbalance in the system that allows unfettered access to the legal process to those with the resources and excludes those without the knowledge or money and that includes most of the poor buggers who don’t manage to find their way to a place like this. CapQuest’s new trick of issuing statutory demands for bankruptcy infuriates me, they seem to have no intention of following up on them and yet I wonder how many poor sods have been terrified into paying money that they don’t owe to people who, probably have no reason to be collecting it. That’s my rant over. Good night, Dogs