Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by shinobi101

  1. Let's get the moral stuff out of the way first. They probably created the money as credit, i.e. it's an accounting entry. They money wouldn't normally even exist if you didn't borrow it. So do you owe it? Really? To answer your question, if send a cca request they are legally obliged to fulfil it. If they get angry about that it means you've near enough already won! It'll cost you a pound, they get them all the time. You've got nothing to lose.
  2. Can you name the DCA?? There must be some caggers who are paying them. Maybe they could help??
  3. I don't understand how I would do that? I offered an F&F for £146 because I wanted them to go away. For the time being they have anyway. I remember threating counter-claim for unlawful recission, but they ignored that completely and have gone quiet again. This is happening a lot. Seems to me Amex are in trouble
  4. It has been for me:D My credit card threads are http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/201111-amex-help-needed.html and http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/207592-bs-bcard.html No court cases, but the DCA's have backed off.
  5. Bill, Brilliant. My next reply to them will be quite short and will include exactly that.
  6. I remember paying £5 for a certified copy of something (I forget what) Remember to ask them to put the cheque details eg. cheque no and acct no on the copy of the reverse side so you can prove it's the same cheque. Can you write anywhere on the front of the cheque e.g. at the top??
  7. We need some clear and simple explanations which explain the technical details clearly and comprehensively, without leaving out important stuff. The links provided by nuke em in post 308 above are very good. There is a section on affidavits on that site as well, which makes extremely interesting reading. I have raised the issue with my bank, but haven't recieved a reply yet (except from their debt collectors)
  8. If you write on the cheque you could get certified copies of both sides. That way you have proof even when the original cheque is lost.
  9. Had a snotty letter from RMA claiming they had made "exhaustive attempts" to contact me, and they would send this back to Amex with a recommendation for legal action. I replied with this: I have received written communication from you dated 19/10/09. Previous to that I received a postcard from you, telling me you would contact me the next day. You didn’t. I assume your letter of the 19th Oct is intended as that contact. You should note the following: 1. If you think one postcard is an “exhaustive attempt” at anything, I can only assume that was intended as a joke. 2. American Express is aware that due to adverse financial circumstances, I cannot afford to pay them. 3. I do not have any assets of any significant value. 4. I have already established with Newman & Co that there is no valid agreement between myself and Amex. Therefore their claim is irretrievably unenforceable. 5. The Default notice they issued was defective in that it didn’t allow for postal service. This means their maximum possible claim would be limited to the £146 shown on the default notice, and even then, only if they could produce a valid CCA. 6. I have offered £146 as full and final settlement subject to the production of a valid agreement. This was ignored. Below is an extract from my last letter to Newman & Co, which was also ignored: “Without a correctly executed agreement you have no basis for action. As you have consistently refused to show me a correctly executed agreement with both signature and all prescribed terms exists, I can only assume this does not exist. The courts are prohibited by s127(3) of CCA1974 from enforcing the alleged agreement based on the documentation you have supplied. If a correctly executed agreement existed, Amex would then become entitled to the total amount £146 as given on the faulty (and therefore ineffective) default notice issued on 21st April 2009, which did not allow, within the notice itself, for postal service. If I receive a valid agreement, I will be prepared to offer American Express the aforementioned £146 as full and final settlement of the alleged debt, provided I receive a letter direct from Amex, in their envelope and on their own headed paper, confirming they accept this as full and final settlement.” Any attempt at legal action would therefore be both vexatious and pointless. CONDITIONAL OFFER TO AMEX The offer is ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY SIX POUNDS (£146) as FULL AND FINAL SETTLEMENT. For a limited time, I am prepared to waive the requirement to see an enforceable CCA. Acceptance of this offer must be confirmed to me directly by AMEX. God’s Peace, [shinobi101]
  10. Issue 1: Doorstep “collections” My letter of the 10th August 2009 was specifically a complaint about the threat of a “doorstep visit.” I made it extremely clear that the issues I raised will not be dealt with in that way. As I stated in that letter: “There are no circumstances under which I would do any of the following with a doorstep caller: • Confirm identity • Discuss any aspect of any financial matter • Offer or make payment in any form” This applies to phone calls as well. I am within my right to insist on dealing with these issues in writing, and am prepared to do so in a reasonable fashion. Your response of 28 September 2009 indicates that you still intend to pursue this matter by means of personal visits or telephone calls. It should be clear from the above that this is not acceptable, and would not yield any useful result. Issue 2: Third Parties With regard to the involvement of any third party, the claim that a third party can be assigned to this case relies on the terms and conditions of the alleged agreement. The documentation supplied does not constitute an agreement, and therefore cannot be used to justify the intervention of a third party in this matter. Issue 3: The original complaint After encountering severe financial difficulties I wrote to you on 04/06/09 asking for the following: 1. Validation of the debt (the actual accounting); 2. Verification of your claim against me (a sworn affidavit or a hand signed invoice in accordance with The Bills of Exchange Act 1882); 3. A copy of the contract signed by both parties and therefore binding both parties. This must be an exact copy of the executed agreement in its original form. 4. Your written assurance that when the debt is fully and finally settled, the original instrument of indebtedness will immediately be returned to me in its original form. Your response was a poorly photocopied terms and conditions sheet. This does not identify me, nor was it signed by me, therefore I am not bound by your terms, and you do not have any rights under them. You will note that in point 3 above I ask for a full copy of the signed agreement; it was not a CCA1974 s78 request. Also note that point 1 asks for the bookkeeping records that would show if the alleged money loaned was real pre-existing money or a fraudulent fractional reserve accounting trick. Summary I do not have enough money to meet your claim in full. I do not have any assets of any value. Your failure to validate the alleged debt by proving that the money really existed instead of being “created” by nothing more than an accounting entry suggests to me that the money you claim to have lent me was in fact not real. The Federal Reserve publication “Modern Money Mechanics” supports this view. Should I receive a meaningful response that shows your claim is genuine, then I will supply a financial statement and a pro-rata offer of payment. However, in the absence of a sensible response from you, the situation appears to be that the alleged debt is not genuine, and even if it was, I would have no legal obligation to pay it. I would be grateful if you would now, finally, make a sincere attempt at giving me a meaningful response. God’s Peace
  11. I had a snotty reply from Barclaycard saying even if the agreement is unenforceable in court the normal operation of the contract still continues, and they would continue collection activity by letter phone and doorstep visits. They backed off after my reply (see next post) I still get statements, but that's all.
  12. After telling mercers to get lost I had a letter from Scotcall saying they would make a doorstep visit. I sent them the letter below, copied to Barclaycard complaints dept and to mercers. Only heard from Barclaycard after that. You appear to be acting on the assumption some relationship you may have with “Mercers” is in some way related to me. I am not a party to any such relationship. Mercers are a third party interloper to an alleged contract between the ens legis ‘Mr Shinobi101’ and Barclaycard. No signed contract appears to exist, and therefore no legal obligation exists between ‘Mr Shinobi101’ and Barclaycard, at least until the said contract is produced. You appear to believe that a “doorstep visit” would apply sufficient psychological pressure to elicit some kind of payment, or at least agreement. This is not the case. There are no circumstances under which I would do any of the following with a doorstep caller: • Confirm identity • Discuss any aspect of any financial matter • Offer or make payment in any form Furthermore, you should note that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make such an appointment with you. There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v Sheppard & Short Ltd [1959] 2 QB 384. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and, if you do so, you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance. This account is in dispute with Barclaycard and will remain so until they send a complete copy of an agreement which is enforceable under CCA1974 s127(3) Attempting collection activity on a disputed account is a breach of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 in line with the Office Of Fair Trading's debt collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998 As Barclaycard are now in default of my Consumer Credit Act agreement request and have also breached *s10 Data Protection Act request , I consider this account to be in SERIOUS DISPUTE. As you are aware while my Consumer Credit Act request remains in default enforcement action is NOT permitted, under s127 this constitutes a complete defence at law. Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS. Now I would respectfully suggest that this account is returned to Barclaycard for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as you or your client cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities. If you choose to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action. After taking advice, I am of the opinion that any continued pursuit is in violation of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 in line with the Office Of Fair Trading’s Collection Guidelines I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished. I trust I will hear nothing more from you before I receive a true and complete copy of a valid consumer credit agreement from Barclaycard. If a valid agreement is received and if money is lawfully owed, a financial statement may be provided direct to Barclaycard, and a pro-rata offer may then be made, payable direct to Barclaycard. Debt Collector’s fees will not be paid as their services are not necessary in this matter. All Barclaycard need to do if they desire payment, is send the alleged agreement as requested.
  13. CCA them all regardless. When you get their replies you'll know where you stand. If they accept £1 it's probably best to give it to them. But if there's no CCA, or if it's unenforceable, then the power is in your hands and if they give you grief you can tell them to get lost. I've got one unenforceable card (Amex) and one no CCA (Sharklycard) both made loads of threats, tried using DCA's, threats of legal action etc. and they backed off after a while. It's gone quiet for a few months. I did let them know very forcefully that they have no legal case, and that I know it. Of course they could try a court case, but I'm not that worried at the moment. You'll get a lot of good quality help on CAG.:grin:
  14. If you agree it all up front then they'll delete all the bad stuff. If you manage to trick them with a cheque that they cash, you'll have to fight for it. You'd have a hard time, but you might be able force them if you approach it right. If you make a tricky offer like here's £100 F&F for a £10K debt, cash the cheque if you want to accept the offer, then you're getting away with a lot. But it's in no way dishonest, as they will read your letter and send the cheque back if they don't want to accept. In that situtation it is only their greed or ignorance that might catch them out.
  15. There is a good reason for dispute on almost all debts. See my favourite thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/175668-how-credit-cards-bank.html Always CCA them, dispute charges, default notices etc. If all else fails, or you're really desperate, "Prove that the money you claim I owe would have still existed even if I hadn't borrowed it." Most of the time they won't be able to do this because most money is borrowed into existence. I would probably keep this as a last resort, but if you're brave or desperate enough it is a valid dispute. Have a major dispute then offer F&F
  16. Thanks Bill, that could've saved me from making a silly mistake
  17. How about sending an offer of full and final settlement for £50, with a cheque enclosed? If they get greedy and cash it, does that mean the debt is fully and finally settled?
  18. Does that still apply when the OC writes and says they don't want to talk to you anymore and tells you to deal with a named DCA?
  19. What is the best way to get rid of DCA? I simply don't want to deal with them. I want to deal with the OC only. Can you simply tell them (politely) to get lost as you have no obligation to discuss private financial matters with them or anything similar? Are there any "get lost I'll talk to the OC only" type templates?
  20. Just curious nuke em, have you successfully rebutted any "invitations" from the MOJ yet? I will listen to those podcasts in full, but do you use the statutory declaration of true name, or something else?
  21. This is one of the ways the fraud built into the system becomes obvious. The government can print, or otherwise create, its own money. There is no reason for the govt to borrow fake money from a private bank and then fleece the taxpayer to repay that which never existed. It's quite comical really, but most people are really sucked in by all this.
  22. Many a true word spoken in jest:D There are many (very) serious claims of senior political figures etc taking part in black magic rituals. If you can cope with it, David Icke's site probably gives some of the most detailed info available. David Icke Website - Home George Bush and John Kerry are both confirmed members of a small and very sinister secret society called the skull and bones society. They were both asked about it (on camera) during their election campaign. Both simply said it's "too secret to talk about" I don't want to hijack this thread with this, but just to highlight that those you mention are not good people. One of our senior politicians (can't remember which) thinks of us (the people) as "cattle." I guess that's why they're always finding new ways to milk us:lol:
  23. I understand that the ministry of justice is a private company, and is mostly there to screw the consumer and help the banks. The questions is when the bank has had enough of you being difficult, and and gets the courts involved, you receive a summons. What do you do then? I will almost definitely get to this stage as I haven't paid anything since last May.
  24. Nuke em Are you a freeman on the land, or in lawful rebellion? What approach are you using to deal with the courts? I'm not really sure about the "not a person" approach. In theory, lawful rebellion sounds good, i.e. "I'm in lawful rebllion under article 61 so I don't have to obey you - get lost" but not quite sure how to put that into legal language.
  • Create New...