Thank you for posting that here. I think that is really great news. DD

Please do. It was a right old squabble! It started on another thread and then the mods started a new thread on the issue to save the original poster from everyone banging on. Their problem had got lost!

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?413904-Statute-Barred-discussion-thread I was particularly interested in the off-setting argument you had. As in your situation, one of the banks kept off-setting, but every time they did it I reported them to the FOS and they had to refund it. They only defaulted me when they finally gave up trying that little tactic so the default was put on about seven months after the final payment. They sold the account on, and I imagine that the DCA involved will be thinking about the default date given by the bank. I've always intended to use the SB argument if I had to so it's great to know that you won your case on the basis of the final payment date. Thank you. DD

That is amazing! Fantastic! Wonderful! There is a mega-long thread on this argument and so much disagreement. If I post the link to that thread here, please could you re-post what you have said above? DD

Hi there, There isn't a drafted letter as such. This is more or less what I said. Different people receive different things, and the points they have to raise depend on the date the account was opened. So basically, Dear Sirs, I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated.... I have not received a copy of the signed alleged credit agreement for this account. I have received only a copy of a signature box and some typed up "agreements" which do not bear my signature. There is no connection between the signature box and these two "agreements" and they were not sent to me at the time I made an application to Capital One. I require you to send me a copy of the entire agreement you allege I signed. I would refer you to the Waksman Judgment in etc., as above to end of paragraph. You are obliged under the Consumer etc., as above to end of paragraph. If you will confirm that you do hold a copy of my original signed credit agreement I will make an appointment to visit your office to inspect it. Anything else you want to add. Yours faithfully, DD

Thank you. I know some people don't agree with playing letter tennis, but I always do. Lowell have a nasty habit of issuing Statutory Demands to avoid going through the usual County Court process and although these can usually be defended successfully it's all a pain. I would write back to them and tell them that in response to your request for a copy of your agreement they have sent you only a copy of a signature box and you require to see the whole document. Refer them to the Waksman Judgment in Carey v HSBC, Paragraph 234 (4) which states that where an agreement has been varied by the creditor a copy of the original agreement must be supplied. Also tell them that the alleged agreements they have sent do not bear your signature and there is no connection between either of them and the signature box. Then tell them they are obliged by the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR 200) to advise you if they hold, or have ever held, a properly executed signed credit agreement for this account, and they are equally obliged to advise you if they hold no such agreement. Tell them that if they do find the entire agreement you allegedly signed you will make an appointment to visit their offices to examine it. They will then write back and ignore your questions! It did take me some time to get them to appreciate my point of view and agree to write off the account, but I got there in the end. Like you, it was quite a large amount of money so it can be done. DD

Sometimes I don't think they check anything - they just say they do. This last waiting bit is awful. I have one account where they didn't default for months after the last payment. I really think there should be legal clarification on the six month start date for SB. NDL and Stepchange websites both say something different. Hang on in there! DD xx

Hi there, Have you posted up the Application form? I've looked at the documents on the first page of the thread and there is something missing. The printed alleged agreements are there, but no application form. DD

Hi beachy, A Pre-Legal assessment isn't the same as a Letter Before Claim so I think you are okay. As Sunflower says, if they know you don't have a property and are living on a pension I don't think they will want to spend the money on a claim. Even if they won you could ask the Court to let you pay it off at £1 a week and it would take them years to get their legal fees back let alone the alleged debt. Did you respond to any of their letters at all? DD

Hi there, Have you got the Default Notice? Forgive me for not reading the entire thread right now. DD

Hi sunflower, So glad you are out of it too! Like you I'm either SB on some accounts or counting the days on the others to default dates, but some of those were put on very late and as it's well over six years and several months since the first missed payment dates I'd argue SB on those if I had to. DDxx

Good luck, but don't expect them to just agree to it. I had to send several letters and get more and more blunt with them. Let's see what they come back with. DD

Hi exasperated, The points you need to make in your letter are: 1. You have only ever received a copy of an application form which does not contain the Prescribed Terms and therefore does not comply with the Regulations of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The alleged (printed) agreement which was also provided has not been signed by you and in any case you can prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that this document was not sent to you at the time you applied to open the account. 2. Tell them that you are aware that none of the early Capital One agreements contained the Prescribed Terms and that Capital One know very well that they are unenforceable. 3. Refer them to the Waksman Judgment in Carey v HSBC, paragraph 234 (4) which states that where an agreement has been varied by the creditor a copy of the original agreement must be supplied. 4. Remind them that they have an obligation under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR 2008) to advise you if they hold, or have ever held, a properly executed credit agreement pertaining to yourself, and that they are equally obliged to tell you if they hold so such agreement. Be prepared to get a letter from them which fails to answer your questions! It did take a bit of time and tennis but I got there in the end! DD

I am only saying what has worked for me. Even when a court case I was involved in was proceeding through the various stages I continued to bombard the other side's solicitor non-stop with questions and in the end they gave up before it ever reached court. If they wouldn't answer a question, and there were a lot of questions they didn't want to answer, I went on and on and on until they did. I did the same with regard to any documents I wanted to see and in the end they had to provide them. The solicitor kept saying he wouldn't litigate through correspondence, but I still kept on at him. (I don't think he minded actually as he charged his client about £30,000 in fees for all the time he had to spend on me!) They could have afforded a barrister for the day's Hearing and I couldn't, and therefore I didn't want it to go to Court. Different approaches work for different people. This is just what has worked for me. DD

Hi exasperated, I got them to write it off by playing letter tennis. I raised a number of issues, which I can give you here if you like, and if they didn't answer properly, which they didn't, I kept repeating the questions. In the end they said they didn't agree with anything I had said but decided to write if off anyway. That meant I got rid of it completely three years before it became Statute Barred. It was a lot of money and I'm glad they gave up because Lowell often start issuing Statutory Demands if they know they have unenforceable agreements. Most people defend those successfully but it's a lot more hassle than getting them to write it off. I'd also rather avoid the possibility of being taken to court even if I knew I had an unenforceable agreement just in case I got a judge on a moral crusade. In this case you can prove beyond any doubt whatsoever that the printed unsigned agreement they say is yours cannot have been sent to you at the time you made your application. I always play letter tennis. It's worked very well for me, and it's absolutely brilliant when you get a DCA to admit that they don't have an enforceable agreement. DD

That's why I think if people show they know their stuff and will be fighting back BW may choose not to pay the next lot of court fees. If you look like a tough cookie they may think twice. Personally I always try to make them think I'm going to be the b**ch from hell if they take me on and I truly believe that's why they have backed off.

Sshhh...

You should win. My only concern is the judge lottery.

Yes, it should be statute barred, of course, but I've never been able to find a case where a judge has ruled on exactly where the six years starts from. It's thought to be the date from when they have a cause of action against you and they are clearly working on the date of the default.

bgizzle would rather avoid Court if possible. I can understand that. Ignoring Lowell might work for you but it frequently doesn't work for other people. They have recently been issuing Statutory Demands like confetti, and they do issue Court claims when they know they have unenforceable agreements as is illustrated only too clearly here. They hope to get lucky and sometimes they are. Equally there have been people on CAG who have gone to Court and despite the fact that agreements have been unenforceable the judge has not thrown them out but has decided to take a moral viewpoint: "You admit you had the money so you must repay it." Therefore they have given judgment to the Claimant. I've seen enough cases on CAG where people who had a sound defence have lost simply because the judge chose not to interpret the law correctly. I can't see that it hurts to let them know that you are aware and armed. I've always found they have chosen not to take me on precisely because of that.

Sorry, you asked what a proper agreement should look like. They all vary, but post 5 on this thread explains it very well: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?163897-Consumer-Credit-Act-1974-(CCA-74)

Wandsworth do occasionally make mistakes on their parking tickets so it you can get it up here the guys might be able to help. I parked late one night in our street which has no parking restrictions and as it was dark I didn't see a sign on garden railings saying there was a temporary restriction for a move. They actually lifted my car out of the way and gave me two tickets - one for parking where there was a temporary restriction and the other for parking on a double yellow line. They cancelled both of them. There were no yellow lines, and temporary restriction notices are apparently supposed to be put up at least a couple of days before and be visible. In your situation I think they may not accept an appeal about parking on the wrong side of the road, but you may be lucky if they've made a mistake on the ticket.

Hi bgizzle, It's more difficult when they've issued the claim, but as you are going to defend they will have to pay more fees to the Court in order to go ahead, so if you let them know you are clued up they may just decide not to continue. The points you need to raise in your letter to BW are: 1. They are well aware that Lowell have not provided a copy of a properly executed credit agreement which complies with the Regulations of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 2. Then you say that you have been advised that the Capital One so-called agreements which were issued in the late 1990s and early 2000s were essentially application forms which did not contain the Prescribed Terms, and this is why Capital One and the debt collection agencies to whom they have subsequently sold the accounts have never been able to provide anyone with a copy of their agreement, preferring instead to provide newly typed so-called agreements on plain paper which are not signed by the account holder, or 'cut and paste' so-called agreements showing only parts of an application form. 3. You refer them to the Waksman judgment in Carey v HSBC, Paragraph 234 (4) which states that where an agreement has been varied by the creditor a copy of the original agreement must be supplied. 4. Lowell have an obligation under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR 2008) to advise you if they hold, or have ever held, a properly executed regulated credit agreement pertaining to yourself. If they have such an agreement, why have they failed to provide it in its entirety? 5. A signature box photocopied on to a piece of paper cannot in any way be regarded as an enforceable credit agreement and you are sure they will advise their clients accordingly. Try that to start with. (You don't have to explain what the Prescribed Terms are for their benefit. They know what they are. My head was spinning for about four months with Prescribed Terms, Regulations, etc., when I first joined CAG so don't worry about all that at this stage. Better just to concentrate on defending the claim.) DD

Yes, I do. Mine also had a note on it on the second page, under the various charges, telling me to deal directly with the DCA handling my account - but there is no DCA handling my account!!!!!!

BTW, was this statement from Advantis or was it the actual statement sent directly from Amex?