Thank you. Well i'm all prepared and ready to roll. I have a simplified list of issues which i will raise (basically explaining why i believe the "credit agreement" is an app form and why the NOA is not valid). I also have a plan B where i can go into more detail should it be required. I think i have covered every eventuality and every trick they might try so i'll be ready with a quick response. But you never know with these people. They seem to have a personal vendetta against me and they appear to be very confident of winning. They seem unphased by the fact i have proven that the NOA states the account was assigned to a company that did not exist until around 18 months later. At the end of the day though, it's only money. There's a lot more important things in life.

Thanks FG. I would like to think that the Judge would take a dim view of the fact the NOA states that the account was assigned to a company that did not exist at the time. I think i'm just going to keep it as simple as possible in court. I suppose the entire hearing now revolves around whether or not the "credit agreement" is in fact an application form and whether the NOA is valid or indeed required. There's not a lot more i can do other than let the Judge decide. I sincerely hope it goes my way because today i received a summary of costs from Morgan solicitors which exceeds £1000.00. I consider this to be outrageous based upon the fact that their input consists of ONE error ridden, factually incorrect Witness Statement which was not submitted to the court and consequently caused the Judge to adjourn the original hearing.

Good point FG. Do you have an opinion based upon the possibility of the DCA providing actual correct documentation at the hearing? Can they do this even though they have only provided me with a mocked up NOA and a illegible application form masquerading as a credit agreement?

Hi Sunflower. Clearly I'm no expert but i was under the impression that you can use the telephone harassment letter to stop them calling your home number too. Also I seem to recall seeing a letter which forbids them to enter your property even to knock on the door. Something to do with trespassing law I think. Thank you CitizenB. I'm just about to call that number so I'll let you know what the outcome is. Slick, I've already sent the LBA so everything is poised to move to the next stage. Granted, I should've acted earlier but I'm now on the case completely. I e-mailed the IOC three times so far and have had no reply. I'll keep trying and will telephone tomorrow if i still have no response.

Would you suggest I inform the Court and/or the DCA of which cases i intend to refer them to in advance? Also, how likely do you think it'll be that the DCA turn up in court with a true copy of a notice of assignment (and not the one they faked) as well as the original credit agreement (and not the illegible one provided)?

Thank you for your kind words Bankfodder. Admittedly I have indeed let this go on longer than I should have but this was because at roughly the same time a DCA issued me with a Statutory Demand. Therefore I had no option but to prioritise this above the mentioned SAR. I am sure you will agree that attempting to set aside a statutory demand and fending off bankruptcy is more urgent than the Barclaycard issue. Thank you for the County Court advice though. I do have statements detailing many charges although i am missing a few. I'd say I have 90% of all statements within the last 6 years. The address I sent the SAR to was 1 Churchill Place in London. Thank you sunflower, I'll commence bombardment of the IOC tonight.

You're probably right. But I've given the ICO almost 3 months and I'd like to know what other options i have. . Should i now instruct a solicitor to take legal action against Barclaycard? (I'd rather not because of the cost to myself). I'm led to believe the ICO have no actual powers to prosecute Barclaycard and would therefore appreciate some advice I have evidence that they signed for the letters but haven't checked to see if they cashed the postal order. Will look into this tomorrow.

Hi all. I'd appreciate some advice on this if anybody would be so kind. Basically, in February 2009 i sent Barclaycard a SAR via recorded delivery to which i received no reply. I then sent a reminder (recorded delivery) 30 days later which was also ignored. Finally, on the 40th day, i sent a Letter Before Action which stated that i was prepared to give them a further 7 days to comply. Again, i received no response. At this point i reported Barclaycard to the ICO wrote to me and stated that they would be in touch. This was in April and I have heard nothing since. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks FG. I'll have a read through all that. The case they have included is: Van Lynn Developments Ltd v Pelias Construction Co Ltd (8,9 October 1968). Incidentally, do you think it makes any difference that the letter from the Court states that the creditor shall file and serve a statement from the solicitor who issued the first statement, but the DCA have decided to issue this second statement themselves instead of the named solicitor? Basically the person ordered to file a statement has not done so and a different person has stepped and makes no reference to his reasons for doing so. I think this guy is taking it personally because I've had the audacity to challenge, question and correct him. He informs me that he's going to "inform the court of my conduct" despite the fact my "conduct" has discovered that his company had made an incorrect statement to court regarding a statute barred debt. Oh and just to top it off, my "conduct" has forced the DCA to admit that they have a tape recording between myself and one of their phone scamsters despite not including it with my SAR. They claim that this was because obtaining the relevant recordings would amount to a disproportionate amount of effort. Funny how the SAR provided a letter addressed to the FOS where a member of staff at cabot quotes certain aspects of the call. Clearly they are concealing the dirty tricks which their phone monkey attempted during this call as they fear a copy may end up at Trading Standards. Anyway, that's my latest rant over with. I'm off to read up on the new info. Thanks again.

Hi all. Sorry for the lack of posts recently. To be honest, nothing of note has happened since the adjournment. However, the next hearing has been scheduled for a date not too far away and I'd like to ask for some advice if anybody would be kind enough. Basically, the DCA have supplied myself and the court with a new witness statement in which they admit that one of the alleged debts is indeed statute barred. With regards to the non statute barred debt the statement makes no mention of the "credit agreement" which i believe is not enforceable under the CCA. Instead, the majority of the statement seems to concentrate on attempting to prove that a Deed of Assignment is not required and that a Notice of Assignment does not need a signature or date. They have included a copy of a court case from 1968 which they claim is proof that this is the case. Basically, does anybody know of any court cases which I could refer the court to which are historic examples where the judge has ruled in favour of the "debtor" because of any of the following: 1) The credit agreement was not enforceable under the CCA because it was illegible or did not contain the prescribed terms. 2) The Notice of assignment was not valid as it contained no date and signature. Furthermore, the DCA are claiming that the Notice of Assignment is valid even though it states that the debt was assigned to Cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd two years before that trading name was registered. The company was actually in existence at the time of assignment but was named Kings Hill (No1) Ltd. Therefore, the Notice of Assignment from the original creditor has in fact been faked by Cabot. The DCA seem unconcerned by this fact. Anyway, any help would be appreciated

I just want to be able to provide the OFT with a huge bundle of evidence and let them deal with it. I'd like to say I'll just walk away with it at that point but i probably wont because i have a vendetta from when they attempted to trick me into paying off a debt which they have no evidence of and they harassed my mother (big mistake). I think we would all agree that NOBODY is allowed to harass our mums!! As i said previously, the most efficient way a DCA can operate is by ensuring they are in possession of ALL relevant document BEFORE they pursue anybody. Why is this so difficult to understand? They clearly operate on a percentage tactic. They know full well that a significantly higher amount of people will cave in and pay at some point (especially if they can be tricked into it at the first point of contact) than those who will fight to the end. I can completely understand why people may give in at various points. This may be because they can't afford solicitor's fees or the DCA work their magic and make people feel like their is no way out but to pay them off. I must admit that if i had a wife, kids and mortgage i would've paid them off a long time ago. But i am in the unique position of being single, in my 30's and officially of no fixed abode but in full time employment. Their threat of bankruptcy (although not ideal) really isn't as terrifying to me as it would be to most people. They're either gambling that i have a lot to lose or they genuinely detest me so much that they want to bankrupt me. (shame on me for having the cheek to ask them for evidence them for 18 months?) That's why I'm going to meet them head on. I really have nothing to lose. Win or lose at least somebody who reads this thread will be able to calculate the risk to themselves. I've been one of those Caggers who has taken advantage of the good advice given to others on this site for the last 18 months without actually getting personally involved. I've cost this particular DCA a lot of money because i had the "cheek" to be a "rogue customer". It's quite simple really. Prove i owe it and then I'll pay. I wouldn't have got this far without this site and the fantastic Caggers who get involved so i have to give something back (spot the Hollywood style cliche). I hope people consider me as a test case. If i win, I'd like to think that that might inspire somebody to take them on. But if i lose then at least i know other people in similar circumstances who read this might not risk whatever they have. And so it continues.................

I just feel it may have a bigger impact if i wait a while before complaining to the OFT because it seems like never a week goes by without the DCA making yet more embarrassing errors. For example, today i have received a tin pot response to a question i posed to the DCA two months ago. I had simply asked them to explain why the results of the SAR did not contain the recording or transcript of the phone call which they allege I made to them during which they claim I confirmed my details to the DCA. I felt that this was particularly important as their entire claim should surely depend on there being proof that they had tracked down the correct "debtor". Particularly as the SAR flushed out a letter between the DCA and the FOS in which they claimed i had confirmed all my details and even "promised to phone back to make a payment the following day". Their pitiful and desperate explanation claimed that the evidence of this is within the computer generated "Account History" which actually only contains computer jargon referring to a call on that date where the telephone monkey has clicked a couple of buttons which says i confirmed my name, address etc. Funnily enough there is no mention upon this history list mentioning my promise to ring back the next day. So i can only come to three possible conclusions. 1) There was no phone call and the DCA made the whole thing up. 2) There was a phone call but the phone monkey has decided to click the "confirm" button on his computer screen without actually obtaining confirmation. 3)There was a phone call but the DCA do not want to provide the recording or transcript as it will expose their deceitful tactics. I think i am correct in stating that Cabot have a policy of recording their phone calls and state this at the beginning of any such calls. So where is this recording and why are they quoting parts of it to the FOS whilst keeping it well away from me? Surely it is imperative that any DCA stores something as important as its evidence of correctly identifying the true debtor? This is one of the many reasons i feel as though i should just wait until the end of the court business and then submit a huge and detailed complaint the OFT. Otherwise i'll just have to keep on posting more and more additions to them. And trust me, I already have records of dozens of examples of the DCA's dirty tricks over the past year and a half. But i wont bore anybody with them now.

Thanks 42man. I'm making a start on preparing the necessary details for a complaint to the OFT. Do you think they are likely to show any interest though? Bearing in mind the CSA and FOS both sided with the DCA. I should point out that both parties distanced themselves from actually stating that they believe the DCA can legally enforce the alleged debts. Instead, their official stance is that I "probably" do owe these debts. The DCA are attempting to gain favour in the Judge's eyes by repeatedly stating that the CSA and FOS sided with them. The DCA seem unable to grasp the fact that this is not very impressive or relevant bearing in mind both parties did not confirm their belief that the alleged debts are legally enforceable. Don't worry too much if Morgan do contact you Cymruambyth. I was originally concerned by their involvement and the legal jargon that they threw into the equation. However, when i looked into it in more detail it became apparent that the DCA had presumably withheld certain facts from their in house solicitors (generally their embarrassingly incompetent errors such as fabricating a phantom payment being made on an account 4 years ago). I think you'll probably discover the same thing if they get involved with your situation. Keep a look out for the poor grammar, spelling mistakes and incorrect terminology. It's hilarious! P.s I don't claim to be an expert with grammar, spelling and terminology but then again, I also don't claim to be a big powerful solicitor (who submits error ridden statements to County Court)!

And the most satisfying thing is that the "statement of truth" from their solicitor actually contains two untruths, poor punctuation and schoolboy error style typing errors. Has anybody else heard of a "Subject assess request"? This numpty has attempted to pick holes in my defence by resorting to petty and desperate means before submitting his error ridden statement to court at the last possible moment. I really should post this "solicitor's" statement on here. It's actually laughable that he has signed something which looks like it has been written by a 12 year old. Memo to all fellow Caggers: do not fear Morgan Solicitors. They are chancers who can't be bothered to actually obtain evidence before providing a Court with their factually incorrect statements. Morgan = Poodles. They do whatever their master tells them to do and never stop to question whether or not their master is lying to them. When the solicitors follow the trawler it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea!

You are a star 42man. I will take great pleasure in ramming this where the son doesn't shine. I was having second thoughts about all this since the adjournment as my confidence in winning had faltered a little. But i've thought about it and i'm not prepared to hand this to them on a plate. I'm not going to allow their shoddy, deceitful and incompetent behaviour to result in their victory. Debt collection should be simple really. A DCA should purchase debts WITH all the relevant documentation and ensure that in the event of being challenged, they are able to quickly provide cast iron proof. Simple! I wish everybody knew that it is possible to take them on. I'll never know why these DCA's seem to get offended when somebody has the "cheek" to ask for some proof. If we all sent off money to anybody who asks for it without providing evidence i suspect that we'd all own shares in a fictional Nigerian gold mine and be inadvertadly funding the Russian mafia

Thanks Foolishgirl. Yep its another 6 weeks and at least i now know how the process works so i can just concentrate on dealing with this matter. I'm fairly certain that i wouldn't have been granted an extension had i pulled the same dirty trick. It's frustrating because the court costs for yesterday will now be added to the next hearing. Thus meaning i'm running the risk of paying (if i ultimately lose) for yesterday even though it was adjourned through no fault of my own. I may well post the statement in the next few days but i want to have a proper look at it first. Thanks for all the advice though. I really appreciate it.

Sorry everyone. Been in work til now. It was adjourned for another 6 weeks because their solicitor decided to draw up a witness statement the day before the hearing. The judge wasn't best pleased about this as they knew of the date of the hearing some three weeks ago but chose to "ambush" both myself and the court by not submitting this in advance. There's quite a lot of legal references within this new statement so i'll get cracking with trying to discredit it. There was a small victory though as the solicitor has finally admitted that one of the two debts is indeed statute barred (as I've been telling the DCA for months). So that's a third of the total debt that they cant now enforce at law anyway. And so the battle continues..........

Thanks NWJ. I will try to let you know how it goes tomorrow. Although i suspect i'll go straight to the pub afterwards. Good luck on Thursday anyway. Glad to hear plenty of other people are standing up to these shambolic numpties.

Thanks. Will let you know how it goes and give you more details that may or may not be of use to you in future.

I'm in court tomorrow 42 man. Not sure what to expect but i'll just see what happens. The DCA has ceased all contact with me over the past few weeks and have ignored all my perfectly valid questions/corrections regarding what they claim. I'm not sure what to make of that.

2002

Thank. No i can't read a thing. Also the year of the date under the signature has been removed and replaced with four commas for some reason. Very strange

Hi all. Can anyone tell me if the document supplied by a DCA is a credit agreement or an application form?

I've not actually been supplied with a reference number or claim number by the court. Is it likely to be the number stamped on the document by the court? It says: Received xx/xx/2009 A/c No. xxxxxx Or is this just for the court's internal records? If nobody knows i'll ring them tomorrow to find out. Would just prefer to do it tonight so i can have it all printed and ready to roll.

Yes I'll submit the neccessary 3 days in advance. Your help is very appreciated.