Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

1 Follower

About newbloke

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. dont ring them, wait for letter threatening legal action.if the one you have already does state that they may take legal action, then write to them at their registered adress,to the directors, requesting under pre action protocols of the civil procedures rules, for a copy of the original properly executed agreement relating to the ALLEGED account, all statements issued throughout the ALLEGED agreement, AND ALL NOTICES OF VARIATION ISSUED, AND MODIFIED AGREEMENTS.
  2. its up to you, i wouldnt bother, they will probably sell it on
  3. hi, they cant send a bailiff until they have a court order, they cant have a court order without an enforceable agreement, which they dont have, if i were you i would suggest writing to the dca, nicely, and ask them to confirm under cputr 2008 if they have an enforceable document, then sit back and wait.most of all dont worry.
  4. please read the barclaycard application again, and you will notice that the signature box states " this is a credit agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974, sign it only if you wish to be legally bound by its terms, exactly as the lloyds application that also puports to be an agreement. void sec 59, therefore of no legal value and absolutely unenforceable under sec 78, 85 where varied/modified.
  5. thats the whole point, its an application which binds you into an agreement, but allows them not to be, hence void by sec 59, how can it be an agreement if antecedent negotiations have not taken place and they have not informed you of the amount rate and charge for credit ?
  6. here is the proof of the pudding, last post is exactly what you have got, an application, have a good day ! http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclaycard/166878-my-mrs-barclaycard-2.html
  7. what you have is a precontractual application, which puports to bind you into an agreement, but gives the creditor the option of not becoming part of the agreement, as they have the option of rejecting your application following credit checks, this document is therefore void under section 59.a signed application for a card is required by sec 51 where there is no agreement already in place, and is signed in respect of part 4 of the act, seeking business and quotations. entry into an agreement takes place in part 5 of the act. here is section 51, part 4, sec59, and sec 60 which relates to signin
  8. hi, sorry to hear about your troubles, the document they have supplied is pre contractual and is a credit card application compliant with sec 51 of the act, which reads; 51 Prohibition of unsolicited credit-tokens (1) It is an offence to give a person a credit-token if he has not asked for it. (2) To comply with subsection (1) a request must be contained in a document signed by the person making the request, unless the credit-token agreement is a small debtor-creditor-supplier agreement. (3) Subsection (1) does not apply to the giving of a credit-token to a person— (a) for use un
  9. hi, send them a letter stating that they are comitting fraud by misrepresentation under the fraud act 2006, by implying they are acting on behalf of littlewoods, as you have had no notice of assignment from them. also tell them you are going to report them to the information commissioner as you believe they have obtained your data unlawfully under the data protection act 1998(criminal offence)
  10. a creditor has to have the original signed agreement compliant with si 1983/1553 if they are persuing you. if you are persuing them then the onus is on you to prove no such agreement was signed. 1983/1557 sec 11g stipulates that copy doc regs do not apply to an agreement that has been modified, it also states that where an agreement has been modified, the earlier agreement must be supplied under sec 78 and 85, they cannot enforce until they do.the oft introduced default charges of £12 in 2006, so if your agreement is pre 2006 then your original default charges are different to this, therefore
  11. 1. sec 78 request submitted, if after 12 working days you do not receive a true copy of the executed agreement, the account is unenforceable untill you receive your executed agreement. 2. sec 189 describes an executed agreement as a document embodying the terms of a regulated agreement signed by both parties. 3. the part of the act that is very interesting is sec 82, where an agreement is varied with relation to credit limits/ amount frequency of repayments/charges/apr, the creditor is required to issue a modifying agreement, so at that point the executed agreement becomes a modified agree
  12. most people have over looked this very important part of the act. 1. sec 78 requests a copy of the executed agreement. 2. sec 189 describes an executed agreement as a document signed on behalf of both parties embodying the terms of a regulated agreement. 3. once an agreement has been varied it becomes a modified agreement. 4. copy document regs si 1983/1557 do not apply to sec 78 or 85 where an agreement has been varied 5. therefore where an agreement has been varied(modified) they have to supply the original signed agreement under sec 78 and 85, the proof of this lies in 1983/1557 s
  • Create New...