Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by shinobi101

  1. Can anyone dumb this down for me? If they've securtized, does that mean the debt is paid? Does it mean (if proved) that we wouldn't have to pay? Or the debt is owed to an entity we don't have a contract with, so tough?
  2. Thanks to all. I'll post the agreements when they arrive.
  3. I have 2 loans with Barclays, both after April 2007. Both signed electronically. Neither had a follow-up contract with a real signature. Are they likely to be enforceable? Are all agreements after Apr 07 enforceable? I don't have copies yet. Requested signed contracts but no reply so far.
  4. Nice one. I'm just starting out with barclaycard, barclays overdraft and 3 loans. Could you please post links to your other threads, would really like to read.
  5. IMHO, you first need to allow the DCA a chance to prove their claim. Explain (in writing) exactly what you require. If they don't prove their claim, then the consideration you offer is to deal with their time-wasting. £30 to write a formal letter is probably fair value. If they don't pay the bill, contact a DCA to collect:lol:
  6. Principality of Range View - Money of exchange, & of account This is really interesting. If the bank creates funds out of nothing, then their "consideration" in the contract is of no value, and they sustain no material loss if you don't pay! The case documents are available from the court. Take a look.
  7. As this is pre-2007, they must have the agreement to get an enforcement order. As I understand it, no agreement - no enforcement. Sec 127(3) (I think) of the consumer credit act 1974 states that the court shall not make an enforcement order unless the "signing of agreement" section has been complied with. If they can't produce the document then they can't prove it was signed. It needs prescribed terms on it as well. HFC/Marbles are not going to like this. They will try to scare you into paying. You will need access to a scanner if you haven't already. If they send you any threatening garbage, scan it, edit out your personal details and post it. There are loads of people on this forum who are very good at helping people in situations like yours. Don't sign any new agreements, in fact don't sign anything!!!! Signatures have allegedly been "lifted" to create fake agreements.
  8. Then diddydicky wrote: You do need to check this. If charges alone have brought the amount over £750, AND if diddydicky is right, then they would no right to issue a stat demand at all. Also, query the "judgement" If you don't know about it, get the details. You will acknowledge the stat demand by doing this, which takes the denial route away.
  9. I wouldn't send them copies of personal documents without getting a lot more advice first. Don't sign anything you send them. Doesn't the legal responsibility to obtain proof of age rest with the service provider? To buy alcohol, parsons would need proof of age (18 or over) but the responsibility to check is with the retailer. Haven't ebay broken the law by failing to establish proof of age?
  10. Don't know mate, but below 750, they can't use stat demand, so they'd have to wait until it was over 750 before they could try again. They will probably accuse you of avoidance tactics. Newmans keep accusing me of that! I've accused them of the same as they refuse to provide proof of claim.
  11. OMG never even heard of that. What can I claim? Was thinking of trying to get Newmans referral fee £980 and any referral fee to Copes as well. Of course I haven't paid those fees, but they are extortionate, and I believe, unlawful.
  12. Do they need a CCJ or anything else before they can issue a stat demand? Or can they just do it? Also, did you know about the CCJ?
  13. Paying part sounds good, but if they slap more charges on then you will be back to square one.
  14. Well done Zhan, good result so far. I've got one of these with Newman threatening to pass it on to Copes with a view to litigation. Newman claim £6500 (ish) I reckon the DN should get a full final on this for £145. I thinking of offering that to Amex:lol:
  15. Good point. Should I send it straight to Amex? What info should I ask for? Thanks
  16. Gone through all paperwork. Found these, dated between the DN and Cancellation notice. They don't look like valid DN's to me. This doesn't change anything does it? AmexExtra.pdf
  17. Not sure. This came from Newmans, on their headed paper, but a lot of it looks like Amex writing. I have been very firm in demanding proof of claim, but Newmans either don't have it, (most likely) or won't provide it. I expect to be dragged through the courts on this:(
  18. The acutal text of their letter is: With regard to your previous letter, which has again highlighted' issues' which can only be construed as delaying tactics on your part, and will not be accepted as such on our, or American Express's part. Please see below for our final responses to your points 1) We have previously provided you with a copy of the application form, and from that you will see it is clear that by signing the form you were entering into a credit agreement. The signature box contains the phrase "This is a Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be legally bound by its terms". When entering into a credit card agreement with you, we were required to send you three copies of the agreement. The first copy (set out as an application form) was sent out in duplicate. One copy would have been signed by you and returned to us. The second copy (unexecuted, in that it would not have been signed by us) would have been yours to keep. The third copy sent to you would be an executed copy of the Agreement, as by that stage it would have been signed by you and by us. We do not send out a version that shows both of our signatures, but nevertheless send an executed copy, which is the 'card carrier' copy sent with your American Express credit card. This executed copy excludes the signatures, but nonetheless complies with the "true copies" requirement of the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983. These regulations allow us to omit any signature and/or signature box, so although the card carrier is the executed copy, it does not have to include our respective signatures. On the basis that you received and have been using your credit card, we can only assume that you have been provided with the card carrier and therefore the executed copy of the Agreement. 2) The default notice sent to you by American Express is not invalid as collection of this debt-did not-commence- until after this default notice was sent to you by first class post, therefore allowing for postal service. 3) You refer to the Account as being "in dispute". However, OFT guidance, states "By 'disputed' we mean genuinely disputed. We are not seeking to protect 'won't pays' but those who are being pursued for a debt they do not owe or genuinely believe they do not owe. Debt collectors who can show that the debt is due and that any dispute has been looked into and the debt confirmed will not be in breach of this provision." We are in no doubt as to the fact that the debt is genuinely owed by you, and believe that since your Account was opened you have been provided with all documents necessary to evidence the debt. If you genuinely believe that the debt is not owed to us, we would ask you to provide details of the company to whom you believe the debt is owed. Clearly, it cannot be the case that you have spent a significant amount of money on your credit card that has not been paid back, without there being a legal entity to which that money should be repaid. Please note that no further correspondence will be entered into with regard to the matter of CCA 1974. We note from your account history, that you have no family income due to your wife losing her job. You advised American Express of this and yet after this, attempt to claim that this is unenforceable. It is obvious from both your actions and the comment made in email,' that you will respond once your research is complete' that you are intent on avoiding this debt in its entirety rather than attempting to reach a mutually acceptable payment agreement which would see this balance repaid. Furthermore ,your duty to repay funds you quite willingly spent would be fulfilled. However as your actions only re-affirm your avoidance tactics, we are now passing this matter to Copes Solicitors who are instructed to pursue this matter with the assistance of Legal Action. All associated costs will be placed on your account. I trust that this makes the situation clear, and that you will now act positively to repay this debt rather than continue taking the advice of numerous websites, that only serve to make your situation worse.
  19. Newmans have decided to refer this to Copes solicitors. They have denied the defective DN. They say I signed the app form agreeing to be bound by the CCA1974, although it has to be said that this must therefore include s127(3)! They will not acknowledge the lack of valid CCA.
  20. Yes please!! (Not saying I'm capable of it - just it would really help a lot of us, including me, until they finally figure out how to comply with the legislation) I'd estimate that I'm a month of so behind Zhan, as Newman have just passed my case over to Cope's solicitors. I don't know if they actually communicate, or if you just get a summons:(
  21. Hi BRW, Thanks for the extra bits, I'll add those in and send it special D today:)
  22. Thanks to all. I'm ready to reply to the DCA. Any advice or comments please? ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE This account is in dispute for two reasons: 1. Invalid/unenforceable CCA. An application form is NOT a consumer credit agreement. It is an application form. The document supplied does not contain any of the prescribed terms on the signed document, and is therefore unenforceable under the consumer credit act 1974 s127 (3) “The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with...” The statement of terms and conditions attached is a customer copy to keep, and is not signed, and cannot be regarded as part of a valid CCA. 2. Invalid default notice. The default notice issued is invalid as it does not allow for postal service. It does not matter what was done after the invalid default notice was issued, it is the fact that it was faulty that counts. As the default notice was faulty, even if a valid contract can be produced the maximum claim is now limited to the amount stated as in arrears on the default notice itself. With regard to your involvement, 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. The standing of Newman & Co in this matter requires both a valid contract authorising it, and written confirmation from the original creditor that they have assigned agency to you. This is the "proof of agency" I requested in my letter of 16th May. It was not a request for a "deed of assignment." as you did not at any point claim to have "bought" the alleged debt. You will need to clarify the situation with American Express with regard to the existence (or not) of a valid, enforceable consumer credit agreement.
  23. The T&C's they've provided me with are not signed. And it can't the back of the app form as if it was it would be the amex copy, not cust copy. I'm assuming the agreement is therefore enenforcable as the app form doesn't have prescribed terms. Would appreciate confirmation on this.
  24. Thanks for all your help with this. How do I lock into that fact? Are there any templates to lock them into the default situation and limit their claim? I also believe the "agreement" (shown in message 8 on this thread) is invalid, so that should reduce their claim to zero. Any templates that deal with this? I think it's invalid because the application form doesn't seem to contain any presribed terms, and the terms and conditions attached is a "customer copy to keep" and so cannot be part of the same document, and is also not signed. Am I right? Many Thanks
  • Create New...