Assuming that Barclaycard fail to find smt's agreement in the next 21 days.... I cannot see the point in now incurring (or risking) significant legal costs, which PT estimated at £2k-£3k, just to obtain an injunction against the creditor. Surely it's better just to sit back for 6 years until it becomes statute barred anyway. If they can't find it when the court tells them to find it, they're hardly likely to find it by accident in the future. They probably don't have it at all - perhaps they never had it in the case of the Goldfish cards. And it's not like smt has to worry about DCAs - just show them a copy of the letter that Barclays will have to produce in the next 21 days - which will be telling the court and the debtor that they don't have the agreement. No DCA will want to bother pursuing somebody who holds such a letter (and who is obviously confident about the court process). As for the credit file, if they don't have the agreement then they don't have proof of smt's consent to share data with the CRAs. So you can complain to the information commissioner about this, and if that doesn't work bring a small claims action under the Data Protection Act to have your file cleared up. This just makes more sense to me than going down the injunction route, which is surely more difficult, more expensive and more risky. Do please tell me if I have missed something.

PT Is there some information anywhere on how much it costs to get an injunction, and whether there are cost implications against you if you lose (I mean if it isn't granted or it is later overturned)? Also, I was under the impression that an injunction injuncts somebody NOT to do something - i.e. prevents them from taking a course of action unless they can prove they have a right to do it. So surely the court wouldn't be in a position to order them to actually remove a default you had already received? Does this mean the correct process is:- 1. CPR 31.16 victory > creditor admits they don't have the agreement 2. Injunction application > creditor ordered to stop chasing payment and to stop processing credit data 3. You can stop paying And also, doesn't this mean you'll still have the old outstanding balance on your credit file forever more?

Thanks Beachy, that is a VERY good point - and one which deserves to be spread around the forum a bit more. I will certainly add it to the list of reasons we are not going to pay them anything - and, in fact, I think I might include it in the FOS complaint which we are due to start just before the 6 month deadline is up next month. The alleged outstanding balance in our case is well short of £1,000 - so I can't see them bothering with a court claim against this mounting body of evidence against them.

What??? Is this from the 1 inch thick pack with all the call notes? Could you post up a copy? Do you have a thread going on this?

smt (or PT) Great thread, thanks for sharing. Ok, so if Barclays can't produce the agreement within the 21 days ordered by the court, then the debt becomes unenforceable for ever more. At this point, they might just give up and write the debt off, so you might not even think it's worth bothering trying to get an injunction against them. But what about defaults? In my friend's case http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclaycard/187319-militants-friend-barclaycard.html we have a situation where we are on a long (10 years+) payment arrangement, but no default has ever been issued. So even if we are successful via the CPR 31.16 route, at the point we decide to stop paying we could still end up with a defaut for 6 years. Have you ever been defaulted on this account? I guess by extension my question really applies the credit reference agency data in general - i.e. will they now show your alleged debt as fully satisfied? Would it be necessary to obtain an injunction to stop them processing data on your credit files? Or can you use the Data Protection Act here? (because if they have lost your agreement they can't prove you ever consented to sharing of data)

Here is the thread with today's success....... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/165349-smt37-morgan-stanley-goldfish.html Well done smt! (and thanks to PT too)

Brilliant smt, can't wait for the full report! I wonder if they will start dealing with this properly now. I'm pretty sure Barclays will have massive provisions in their accounts against all these alleged debts anyway, so it won't make any difference to them if they end up writing them all off.

I don't think you will avoid it in the first instance. However, if the agreement has been terminated that would presumably mean they no longer have a right to share data with third parties (DCAs) that you only agreed to in the original agreement. Therefore any default is a breach of the Data Protection Act, as well as being potentially defamatory on account of it being untrue.

The 2006 changes became law in Jan 2007 I think.

Hi N.P It's a threat-o-gram - don't let them wind you up. Having said that it surely counts as a Letter Before Action and therefore deserves a (special delivery) response. What's the betting if you send an account in dispute letter setting out your s18 multiple agreement points, Moorcroft will give up and pass the account back to Egg?

Do you have a thread for this case?

Does this mean that Moorcroft have given up and so Egg have passed your account onto Capquest instead? They shouldn't be passing an account around at all if it is in dispute. There is no harm in sending a copy of your previous letter to Capquest. Ignoring letters and doing nothing is not always a good idea. Having said that, the above really does look like a standard threat-o-gram letter designed to scare you. The solicitors letter they mention is a mystery - why would debt collectors still be chasing you if things were now in the hands of solicitors?

Egg are systematically failing to respond to these requests within the timeframe now - some CAGgers have been waiting for months. Hopefully complaining to the Information Commissioner might speed things up a bit for you.

Good luck, subbing with interest, as I have a similar thread. (it started as a PPI complaint and moved onto unenforceability issues) http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/178357-militant-consumer-challenges-egg.html

Two threads are recommended reading and both apply to you Potentially unenforceable Egg agreements http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/188093-egg-credit-agreements-what.html The Egg Card credit facility termination issue http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/136848-termination-egg-credit-card.html

The normal process will be to complete an income and expenditure form (which they will send you) and this should indicate how much he can afford per month.

If I was intending to fully pay up 100% of the balance then I would probably just call them and agree to speak to their Collections Department. If you don't want to do that then the Viscount's advice is a good alternative. I really don't see the point in trying to "sod em" if you are going to pay the account off soon anyway. That could result in a default notice being issued, harming your credit file for 6 years - all for no reason.

In the meantime you can of course agree to pay an affordable payment every month on account - that is what the judge would order anyway if they took you to court and defeated you. That might keep them off your backs while you work out what you are going to do next.

I would certainly be complaining to the FOS about the PPI as it is likely that this was mis-sold. Many people would at this point say the account is in dispute and refuse to pay any more until the dispute is resolved. I note you have already received a default notice so they cannot hurt your credit file any more that way. We are challenging one of these agreements here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/174507-militant-consumers-friend-egg.html We are also challenging our Egg Card account for various reasons. The reasons are here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/188093-egg-credit-agreements-what.html Our Egg Card case is here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/178357-militant-consumer-challenges-egg.html

Not advisable if you want to settle in full and would prefer not to have a default on your credit file for 6 years.

Subbing - NP is challenging this on s18 multiple agreements basis in his own thread. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/182571-n-p-egg.html

I always wondered why my Egg Card credit limit was £4,800 - always seemed a strange amount. Now I know!

I didn't realise you had such a recent loan. The agreement itself is likely to be enforceable as the electronic signatures had been legalised and also I notice the PPI is clearly separated out from the cash loan (unlike with earlier loan agreements). HOWEVER, if there has been any funny business in arranging the loan, you might have some comeback. PPI mis-selling springs to mind.

An update. Egg have finally responded to our January letter (of which we had to send a second copy in March due to no reply). Their response is a holding letter in which they apologise for taking so long to reply, and they say they will now carry out an investigation. Don't forget, we haven't even got as far as complaining about mis-sold PPI or the section 18 multiple agreements angle yet. All we have done is ask a few follow-up questions to the SAR - as listed in post #81 above. We have now also cancelled our monthly payment, and we do not intend to pay another penny until this is all resolved, if at all ever again.

Did you ever find out if there was any PPI on your loan? Did you send for a copy of the agreement?