Two CCJ's, one from a loan- Did offer a payment plan when I went into debt, but creditor decided it was not enough. I accepted the claim and court agreed the payments. Other was through a contested Credit Agreement but Judge ignored High Court cases and law and awarded the creditor. Could not afford to contest. Have defaults on others, some I have agreed to repay (The Lawful agreements- Most have been helpful) Have some that are still outstanding which have no enforceable credit agreements, or invlaid default notices or simply can't be bothered to follow the rules. Trying desperatly to get out of this mess but need a better paid job to pay back what can be enforced through a court of law. I don't see why your credit history has anything to do with your employment. Some professions may have a bearing eg: Financial Advisors but I have always acted correctly and professionally.

I am getting a little upset. I have applied for another job and I am about to be turned down as I have adverse credit history. This is working for a lettings agency, just simply valuing properties and gaining instructions. I really need this job as it will provide me with the income to finally start getting myself and my partner out of the hole we are in. I need to earn between 25 to 30k plus (Before my income dropped I was on 40k plus) The last 18 months I have only been able to get jobs around the 17k region. Has anyone got any advice? I have tried to change careers but all I get offered is low paid jobs and we are getting desperate. This job would enable to start making arrangements with creditors and to pay back what I owe.

Exactly. Even though we have a full confession, the so called regulator is failing in their duties and responsibilities. I wish there was something that could be done with these so called regulators as most are not fit for purpose.

I have already done something similar, however, I refrained from going further as I was waiting for Otelo. Again, I have pointed out to Otelo that if I did take Talk Talk to court, they could be liable for more. Its Otelo that appear not to have a grip on things.

Need Some advice. After the above Otelo contacted me after several weeks. In conclusion Talk Talk admitted that they had made mistakes, however. 1) At the time I cancelled the account back in May 2010, the current outstanding bill was £39ish however, Talk Talk still owed a back log of credits which meant that they owed me money. At the time Otelo wrote back in November, Talk Talk had continued to bill me, no credits and no cancelled account. The amount was £179 at the time. Talk Talk offered to credit the account to £0 and offer me £40 in compensation. Otelo ruled that they were offering to cancel the account free of charge as a gesture of goodwill and reduce my liability by £179 to £0. They also upped the compensation to £100. 2) They ruled that my claim of £300 was excessive, despite the amount of time I had spent writting to them, incurring phone bills trying to resolve this, incorrect billing by Talk Talk meaning that Talk Talk should have owed me money, talk talk refusing to cancel my account and they had no legal reason to charge me a cancellation charge and despite Talk Talk passing my details onto a debt collection agency. 3) I wrote back relunctantly accepting the £100 but stating that I was out of pocket. I also pointed out that at the time of cancellation they would have owed me money at the time. The £179 outstanding was down to Talk Talk not cancelling in May 2010 when they should have done. 4) Otelo wrote back on December 8th stating that they would be reviewing my contents. 5) Talk Talk then reduced the bill to £0, but since then have continued to Bill me again. The bill is now reasing £129. 6) I have pointed this out to Otelo but they did not seem to want to know. They stated that they are taking up to 10 weeks to reply. 7) I wrote a letter of complaint to Otelo as the tone of their letters, lack of urgency and I pointed out that this complaint with them has been with them since August 2010. I also pointed out that these actions alone seem to send out the signal that Talk Talk can continue treating customers like this and Otelo will do very little about it. I also called into question whether or not Otelo was fit for purpose. (A little bit strong but I feel I am justified due to the length of time this has taken and their lack of support) Any further advice as I was e mailed stating that it could now take another 8 weeks to reply. Am getting very cross and angry about this all!

Yes. You are right. From HL Legal solicitors. Contact experto direct. I will stick to the last letter that I sent experto. Unless they fully comply with my lawful requests, I will not write to them again and ignore all letters. Unless anyone recommends otherwise?

Advice needed. Mbna sent me my subject access request but failed to include the recent statements and deeds of assignment. I wrote to them stating that these were not there and surprise surprise, yet another call from Experto and letters. Also checked on the log from mbna and it clearly states that the debt was charged off prior to the issue of the default notice and sold to experto during the default notice period. (This is backed up by a letter from experto stating that the debt had been sold to them) This goes against what mbna said when i calimed for unlawful rescission of the agreement as they state that the account was sold after the default period and yet all the evidence says otherwise. Sounds like a cover up or fraud to me. Still waiting to hear back from mbna but experto have now passed my details onto their solicitrs legal (something) giving 7 days to pay up the alleged debt or else they may take me to court. Fed up with experto and mbna side stepping everything. Any advice or should I just ignore these letters and calls.

Have written to the oft and CO before regarding other lenders but nothing was ever done. One lender was found to have breached the subject access request however, at court stage the judge did not want to know.

My thoughts exactly. No valid default notice. Section 78 not fully complied with Subject Access Requests not complied with by both MBNA & Experto No deed of assignment No letter from Varde Unlawfully terminated contract, of which I could counterclaim in a court of law along with costs for unlawful charges. Ignoring section 10 requests False statements by MBNA False statements and threats by Experto Not a chance of paying a single penny. More of a chance of me counter suing should I have to but they do not even have an enforceable agreement in place so this has a good chance of being thorown out by a court of law.

Default notice dated 9th oct for full balance. rectify by 26th oct. Letter from experto dated 17th Oct saying that they were representing varde and had been sold the debt. Just had the mbna subject access request today. Log confirms charge off on sep 30th. Sold to varde 17th Oct. No deed of assignment for mbna to experto, no mbna statements included since they took over from beneficail bank. No deed of assignment for mbna taking over from beneficial bank. Also on the log, they had received a letter of complaint on the 6th Oct, with a note to put on hold for 28 days. Complaint was ignored and reply not sent until 20th Nov. I have also writen to mbna accepting unlawful termination of contract. They wrote back saying that the debt had not been sold until end of oct, after the default rectify date. Log and Experto say otherwise. Sounds to me both mbna and experto are acting outside the rules on this, could this be possible fraud?

I am having similar problems with Experto. MBNA and now Experto have only sent application form and current T&C's. This does not comply with the Waksman Ruling. Application does not contain prescribed T&C's. Experto did not respond to my Subject Access Request until last month. (It's taken them 9 months to admit that they had received this request and that I paid for it) They have hardly produced anything and the deed of assignment is typed on one sheet, no date and is in no way a proper legal document. They still call me on the phone and have ignored my requests to remove my number and ignored my section 10 request. Have never receivd a proper deed of assignment from mbna. They also sold the debt prior to the default notice and Experto wrote to me during the default recification period. Have accepted there unlawful termination. Just being ignored by Experto. Wrote back in December to MBNA again for another subject access request. No acknowledgment. Almost 40 days is up. Keep on having this same problem over and over again with both of them.

Have written to MBNA with another subject access request. The response so far. Nothing from MBNA but after several section 10 requests for Experto not to call on my work mobile. 1) Text sent on the 24th December from Experto with their xmas opening times and their 24 hour payment facility. 2) The multiple phone calls started on the 27th Dec. Happy xmas from experto, ignoring my lawful requests.

Just to clarify in my mind, what prescribed terms are missing? Also, what rights do they have to pass on my info without my permission?

I agree, they are not the same copies or type face. What would you suggest I reply with? I still consider this account in dispute as Barclays ignored my section 10 request and have not supplied the correct info. Assuming that these are what they will use in court, what is wrong with them in terms of prescribed terms. I am having trouble trying to see what would be wrong. I am in two minds wether to sit it out or make a full and final settlement offer based on them not compying with my subject access request, passing my details onto a third party (There is not data proection notice on the original application form, failing on my section 10 request, unlawful bank charges, and not complying with the oft's guidelines (As per Carey Judgement) as what is required on s78 request. Furthermore, if the agreement is defective, then they cannot enforce this through the courts.

Sorry to sounding slightly stupid, but I have read both the application form and the t&c's they say applied at the time of the agreement. (They will not confirm that these were the actual ones.) I am unsure if this has the prescribed terms. Could someone have a look? Thanks

On all the application forms I have seen, they have a section on the Data Protection act- Your rights. Most have a box for you to sign. This does not metion any of it.

Ok. I can see where we are. Barclays still have not forefilled what is fully required, as per carey case. Assuming that this is all they have, what defence can I mount. From experience they may use this as ther credit agreement. What is wrong with it? I can then make an offer on the basis that therefore they are not entitled to enforce it through the courts. Equally as they have not produced the required docuements from my s78 request and subject access request they are not entitled to enforce it through the courts. Again, looking at the info I have suppled, I cannot see any reference to the dat protection act. Does that have to appear on it?

Orginally requested in May 2009, at last I get a copy of their application form. Can anyone suggest what to write in response as this does not look like a valid credit agreement. I have also attached t&c's they sent last august which does not look like what would have appeared on the rear. Any ideas on what to respond. Still does not comply with the Carey ruling but at least I have this now. Here it is at the bottom of this : img-Z14130227-0001.pdf

At long last Experto have sent my Subject Access Request, however, all they have supplied is computer printouts from their call log and what they are calling a deed of assignment from MBNA (Which has never been received) Perhaps people can give me advice on this. They state that this is all they have on file for me: 1) Call Log- This starts from November 2009, however, they have had the account since 30th September. From a previuos request, they sent another call log dated from this date. It now appears that this is now missing. The default date was 30th Sep and the letter from experto came in between the default date and remedy by. Also I have noticed they have tried to work out the equity in my home and marked it on the log. 2) The deed of assignment is on a MBNA paper. It reads: Account Number: XXX Customers Full Name: XXX Last Known Address: XXX Date Account Opened: date in 1994 Default Date: 30th Sep 2009 Assigned Balance: £xxx Agreement Type: Credit Card Dear Sir/ Madam We confirm that the balance outstanding under the following account has now been assigned to Varde Investments, address in Ireland. In accordance with the aforementioned assignment to Varde Investments Ltd, now holds all legal rights, authorities and obligations to the same. Yours Faithfully XXXX That's all it reads. Looks like a cover letter, not dated. Can anyone tell me what it should contain? In terms of the subject access request, they still have not confirmed the date they purchased the debt despite a number of requests, plus there is very little information. I have the front copy of the original application from beneficical bank, but nothing that complies with the Waksman ruling or the OFT guidelines on what should be suppled under a section 78. Any advice on what to write back? The outstanding balance of the default should have been about £934, not the full amount outstanding. I have written and accepted the unlawful rescession of the agreement. Thanks in advance

And then out of the blue, MBNA write with my section 78 request made in June 2009. They stated that this is incomplete and they will not take any court action at this time. Only when they have retreived all the info. They also stated that payments should continue to be paid as per Carey V HSBC case. The current credit agreement they have sent only has my address on it and the 'original credit agreement' is an illegible photo copy of an application form, not containing the prescribed t&c's. This account is still in dispute as they have unlawfully terminated the agreement due to an invalid default notice. As far as I am concerned I am only liable for the arrears at the time, which they have said is the full amount on the default noticed, less unlawful charges and claim for unlawful termination. Any suggestions on what to reply? Does the OFT guildlines still apply on debt collection if the account is clearly in dispute? Any suggestions to write back.

Hi I am not an expert in this, but like you I am in the same situation with Experto. I am waiting for a full subject access request from them. It has taken 6 months for them to finally acknowledge I have made a request. I would recommend you applying for a subject access request if you have not already done so. I would also do the same on MBNA. Don't forget to ask for everything. That way you should be able to get dates. How much was the default sum for? Was it the full amount or arrears? Try to post up the default notice on here. I know its difficult but I would try to ignore Experto's threats. They are not pleasant to deal with. At the end of the day, Experto will try a number of tricks to get you to pay, however, if the default notice is incorrect and they have unlawfully terminated the agreement, you are liable only for the arrears. You can also counter claim against unlawful rescession and unlawful charges. Chances are Experto could owe you.

Like a number of people, I have only had T&C's. If I have read the OFT guidance on section 78 right, these should bear your name and the address that was appropriate at the time of application. Furthermore they should supply a copy of the credit agreement. Under money laundering rules, a copy must be kept 6 years after termination of the relationship. If no original, copies of how it was disposed, who did it and so on. Lord Waksman also ruled that where an agreement terms have changed, a copy of the origianl should be supplied. Surely either subject access request or a section 78 should produce this anyway?

I have adjusted this letter slightly in light of the OFT review. Had Weston's solicitors write today. What happens if they do produce something such as an application form? I write with reference to your letter dated xxxx. I acknowledge no debt to your client or yourselves. For your information, this account is in dispute with Barclaycard and has been since 01st July 2009. My previous dispute from 27th April and 12th June 2009 has NOT been answered. Barclaycard or any of their representatives have failed to respond to my legal requests. 1) On 12th June 2009 I made a formal request for a true signed agreement for the alleged account under consumer credit Act 1974 s77/8. Barclaycard have failed to comply with my request, and as such the account entered default on 01st July 2009 and is in dispute. Barclaycard have only sent me a blank copy of the terms and conditions. I refer you to the judgement made by his honour Judge Waksman in the Carey V HSBC case. The information that Barclaycard have sent falls short of what is deemed as acceptable. Furthermore; Judge Waksman stated “If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, the creditor must still supply a copy of the original agreement, as well as the varied terms”. Barclaycard have not sent a copy of the original agreement along with the original terms and conditions. In addition, they have not sent copies of any variations. Further more “The s.78 copy must contain the name and address of the debtor, as it was at the time of the execution of the agreement “ The terms and conditions do not contain these. Furthermore the OFT published guildlines on the 16th October 2010 confirming what is allowed and what is not acceptable to a Section 78 request. Barclaycard have failed to comply with what is required. 2) Barclaycard have failed to supply me with all the documents in my Subject access request made on the 27th April 2009. This included a copy of my original credit agreement. Accordingly, I have to tell you that Barclaycard have not yet complied with their obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998. PLEASE NOTE: that unless otherwise stated by yourselves and if the above documents are NOT provided, it will be CONFIRMED that you are unable to reproduce/provide in any way shape or form any copies of the above requested documents. You are reminded that you have a duty to inform me if you do not have the above documents. This is confirmed in High Court Law - Ezsias v Welsh Ministers - [2007] All ER (D) 65 (Dec) " In addition, the OFT recently have also pointed out that “If the creditor or owner is aware that there was never an executed agreement and one was required, it would be misleading and an unfair business practice to try and conceal that fact, either by suggesting that the agreement cannot now be found or by creating a copy agreement purporting to be a true copy. If the reason why no copy is given to a request under these sections is that there never was an executed agreement, the creditor or owner should acknowledge this in its response. 3) Barclaycard have done nothing to resolve the situation and been unhelpful. This dispute could have been resolved a long time ago if Barclaycard had wanted to resolve this. Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS. The courts attention will be drawn to the fact that Barclaycard have had amply opportunity to resolve this dispute and any additional costs incurred will be of their own making. Now I would respectfully suggest that this account is returned to the Barclaycard for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as Westons or yourselves cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities. If Westons or yourselves chooses 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 Tradings Collection Guidelines. I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished. I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter. If you are Barclaycard are unable to produce the requested credit agreement, then you must confirm so within the next 14 days. Unless Barclaycard remedies these breaches and responds to my other letters, in line with the regulations and laws that Barclaycard and yourselves must abide by, I have no legal obligation to respond further to you. Yours Sincerely

Haven't had a reply to my last posting. Can anyone clarify if an overdraft is covered under section 77 or 78 of the consumer credit act. If so, surely the application form I have been sent is not compliant. Secondly, whilst I have agreed to repay the loan only, they have consolidated everything into one account ie: loan, CC and overdraft. I have verbally and put in writing that I accept only the loan.

Just a bit of advice. I joined three over 18 months ago. Originally had an INQ phone. One of the main features is that it could be used as a USB modem and you could use it with your PC for the internet. It was just plug in and go. I upgraded a few weeks ago. I asked for the same facility and same feature. The lady that sold it gave me a new samsung phone which she said offered the same. I emphasied that it was important that it had this feature and advised her I would be using it insetad of a dongle. A couple of weeks after receiving the phone, I tried to use it on the PC. It did not work. I tried again a few days later. Still did not work. I called 3. It took them ages to see if the phone was compatible. They basically said that I would have to pay extra to use this facility. I complaigned that I was not advised this as I did not have to on original INQ phone. I stated that I felt I had been mis sold this as they had not stated all the facts at the time of the upgrade. Almost an hour later they played back the recording of the original call. They said I was correct that I had asked for this facility. They then tried to defend their staff saying that she was techinally correct and had given me the right phone. Due to this they would noy let me return the phone. I pointed out the regulations to them advising them that they should have said that this phone would cost you extra if you wished to use it on your pc. After over an hour they came back and offered me a mobile broadband extra on my account. They said that they would not charge me £15 extra for this feature, only half price at 7.50. I reluctantly took this, and they said that they would confirm this in writing. They did not and today I called again and took this off the account as I do not see why I have to pay extra for what was originally free and I feel that they did not provide me with the correct info from the start. I would have gone elsewhere if I was to be charged extra. Where do I stand with this. Am I now locked in for the next 18 months??? Apart from the problem with the mis selling, the phone is awful to use.