Hi - not sure if this post should go into MBNA thread but as it is of a general nature i'll include it here - I wrote to MBNA in early August for copy agreement and had reply within 5 days saying they were processing the request. Then instead of a copy agreement arriving a letter threatening that if i did not come to some arrangement to pay the debt it would be written off ! As I already had got a copy of their agreement earlier in the year I had a lengthy letter waiting to fire off with the very numerous shortcomings that were in the that agreement - but I wanted to see what they sent 2nd time around first. While it looks attractive having the debt written off, it is at the expense of my credit history, as the full amount will be defaulted - but as i already have probably numerous defaults and am not wanting to borrow any money again im not viewing that as especially serious - just wondering what other members think about this ? I know they can probably still reactivate it or possibly sell it on at a low price to an aggressive DCA but DCA's are bound by the same legislation and banking code only permits lenders to sell on to reputable firms but how often is the banking code breached anyway so its maybe no comfort ! Also have any members had experience of complaining to banking code board ? I'm tempted to see what happens then reactivate my earlier letter waiting on file. Any views would be very welcome in this surprise turn of events !

Hi Ive read the rules and my description of lenders is a little subjective and in future I will not include that type of comment although I see references made quite commonly in many other posts about such practices - however that is the feeling generated in my realising how much they have raised interest rates unjustifiably. I have also tried to find the introduction area once more to be able to file my details - but finding it is not that easy. Perhaps a link could be provided ?

its good to have debate but if that view was to be taken you wouldn't find out - in my Mint agreement the APR is FIXED at a margin of 9.41 above base. So as there are no grounds for raising it other than seemingly trying to change it for their own gain I cant see how they can. The agreements all vary e.g. the Egg agreements in their condition 12 'changes' will not be detrimental to the borrower and grounds for raising the interest are cited and would tend to follow the base rate not double or treble the margin above base. As there seems to be little to go on in precedents then no reliably predictable route can be planned. All manner of attack has to be put forward. A rise for any unspecified 'valid' reason is not likely to be acceptable without some sort of terms of reference. This seemingly regulated business would fail in my business if I were to be allowed to double the charges to clients after first agreeing that would not happen. I don't agree its buyer beware or caveat emptor.

Hi again Peter Cartwrights book is actually P108 - 122 approx not from 118. Consumer Protection etc. Google it and you will be able to read the whole book. I have more info I will be posting tonight about this matter.

Hi All - what we should do is organise a flying picket in Derby at Egg, in Chester at MBNA M&S, Essex at HSBC and MINT all convenitently clustered in groups or pairs, someone acting as spokesperson and plenty of placards the local MP and locals and the Media will soon take an interest in it esp if the credit card company staff wandering past or in and out of the buildings are pressed to discuss it and shamed into working for the despicable cowboys. Anyone up for it ?

Hi all ! My perambulation around these forums posts and threads has helped me take a very positive and increasingly 'moral high ground' approach to my onerous credit card debts. As a now inactive property developer - I cant sell anything - the make do and mend ethos starts with these nasty credit issuers. That my £80,000 credit pile costs or did/would now cost me some some £20,000 pa just to stand still. At the interest rates most of mine were signed up to were - it was half of this - yet the margin above bank base much narrower than now. Not that i've paid any for several months. I am intrigued to find at first what look as though they are enforceable agreements, maybe are, but not all is lost - I hope - the two main areas I am finding worthy of close scrutiny is the prescribed terms which are a customer signed agreement, credit limit,amount of credit, interest and payment details. Other key issues are legibility and due prominence of T&C's. Right to cancel. Courts cannot enforce an agreement if any of the 'prescribed' terms are missing. Section 20 of the 1974 CCA defined interest rate and allowed the OFT to further define. (see their web site for interest details). S.20 requires the total charge for credit to be stated - TCC. Charges typically for cash advances, payment holidays, consumer or card company choice of payment date can all skew the rate beyond the tolerance permitted by the OFT operating within the Act. Sloppy card agreements seem to be so badly put together as to make finding some contradiction at least in my copy agreements quite easy. One of the things which has incensed me is the right to alter interest rates. In an agreement which can bankrupt a borrower later interest commencing at 1.2 apr per month then rising to 24 %apr per annum is a serious cause of such potential risk. So what authority do card companies have to raise rates ? None it seems - in that the ability to alter rates is defined with examples such as banking practices, codes, law etc. etc. and an attempted catch all for 'valid reason'. The former will in an era of falling interest rates give no validity in raising rates. So they would have to try and rely on 'valid' reason. As this is not defined or where it is not then the card company would have great difficulty in asking a court to enforce an agreement where the interest on hard core debt has been raised while bank base rates have declined. The card companies may say the risks are greater and need higher rates to offset that. That is a convenient fallacy as the money owed already is going to be harder to pay if rates rise especially if the customer is in hardship. They may say the cost of borrowing is higher it is isn't the LIBOR rate is not far from the base rate now. They may say fraud and zero rate balances are causing the need to raise rates - these have always been about and like my cards many of them on special rates at the start the honey pot soon turns into a money blood letting bath. However a google search revealed - 'Consumer Protection in Financial Service' by Peter Cartwright Google books pp 118 - 121 see. The author discusses what is 'valid' it seems little or nothing definitely is and my argument is the same. Some of the cards I have such as Egg have explained in term 12 in their T&C's explain when they will alter rates and then add and for 'valid reason'. MBNA dont even bother with reasons they just state 'valid reason' If the courts interpret the valid reasons in the same way i.e. strike it out then the grounds for raising interest rates are effectively removed. Thus even if the APR is correctly stated so as to comply with the prescribed terms the rate increases may trigger refunds greater than the balance depending on how old the persistent core debt is. Especially in my case when i then also found a box I had ticked for PPI on an M&S agreement and an MBNA agreement I didn't even know I had. So i'm hoping for refunded mis sold protection policy plus interest. I am currently dealing with the four companies which have not provided copy agreements. While I'm waiting for the others to send further copies I asked them four months ago and asking Mint again has now produced a copy agreement which they did not at first send. Once Egg and MBNA send me theirs assuming they are the same as before I have letters waiting to go off. Then off to the ombudsman if no satisfactory reply is received. Then also to complain under Data Protection Act if defaults not removed while case considered. I will keep all informed on here.

Hello I did start my own thread but someone hijacked it and put it back on here - i dont know how or why someone would want to interfere but he thought it should be in this thread. As i am not entirely sure as to how this site works I did not know any better at the time. Also thanks for the reply if its not a prescribed term the court may enforce ? but if its supposed to be part of the agreement I suppose its discretionary is it or is it mandatory ? and are they thus likely to enforce ? Also no credit limit in the agreement which IS a prescribed term but can that be stated as we will advise you of the credit limit instead and be valid ? Thanks

Hello there ive got exactly the same with my Egg card agreements the right to cancel is part of the 1974 CCA ACT but nowhere in the Eg agreement is it referred to not even in the separate supporting generic terms and conditions they have sent with the copy agreement. But the ACt also mentions they can be posted with the card and use of the card is deemed acceptance of this right. But how do you know they wont just say they did that as without a signature there is no way of knowing I suspect the ACT means its got to be in the agreement too AND posted out withe card ? If someone could clarify this it might help save me £20k at Egg.

ok - Ill leave it to you.

I have read many threads on here and have replied to several -however I have so far not found a simple researched accurate summary of the key features needed for creditors to be able to enforce an agreement. So while there may be such a list until I can find it I am going to list the issues I think are required - Key features required for enforceability of credit card debts - I will state where I am not sure and hope others can add to this or correct me where necessary - 1. Signature of debtor and creditor - I understand that a rubber seal or stamp can be valid for the creditor. Presumably the date is required too. Name and address of both. 2. Agreement to be headed as such e.g. agreement made under 1974 CCA etc. I understand that an application could be an agreement too if it contains the key ingredients. But if 'application form' or 'reply card' is the main heading and agreement regulated by CCA etc is in subservient position what is position here ? 3. the interest rate - but does it have to be expressed as an APR ? How and when it is calculated and when payments are made. 4. the credit limit but I understand here that this may mean how is the limit set e.g. by subsequent notification on part of the creditor from time to time. 5. Right to cancel ? and should this ALSO be sent with the card or is it ok not to be in the agreement as long as its sent with the card ? My EGG card agreement has omitted this. 6. Legibility and equal prominence of terms and conditions with other sections 7. Terms and conditions as part of the agreement documentation and not contained in separate sheets ? My Egg card agreement is supported by separate generic terms and conditions. Could any members clarify, correct, explain or add to these please ? Then if a key term is missing I understand that the court has to enforce it but cannot enforce if certain terms are missing. Can the ombudsman clarify the issues as has been suggested by my HSBC card where they have no signed agreement ? Many questions and the key factors are not all in the CCA with subsequent amendments and clarifications. What is the position with defective agreements and where the card company over a few years at e.g. 27 per cent apr will have had the total debt repaid back in less than 4 years ? Can the interest be refunded as the difference between a more reasonable rate ? If the card is enforced by the court can they also substitute a high rate with a more reasonable rate and also order a refund ? -?

Hi Scouserlad - I found the template letters in Martin Lewis's web site - Money Saving Expert (that is not on this site ) with a follow on letter for when you find there is no agreement - you can then adapt that second letter for agreements where there are defects too. As far as I can see upon checking references etc it seems correct and seems esp well written. I have also found an alternative option to look at - for example where you have say a £15,000 balance with MBNA for example and that has been on the go for a while the interest which may have started off years ago at say 15% may now be 30% so several years of that the difference at the higher rate could amount to say £6600 over 3 years. I noticed one consumer on here had complained to MBNA about the interest and they refused to lower but upon going to the ombudsman who apparently ordered MBNA to reimburse all of the interest plus damages. So you could see if you can defend an unenforceable agreement and then if it looks as though you may not succeed write to the ombudsman. I don't know whether the ombudsman can look at both together - I would guess in arguing the interest you are accepting the agreement but then if its not properly executed that would be difficult.

Hello Ive spoken to two of credit recovery agents in depth and they said the same it takes 2 months to get a copy agreement. Which most on here can tell you is wrong. It takes 12 days or less and within one month otherwise the card companies are in default themselves. So that should be the first sign these rogues are milking clients. A friend of mine is now on his 3rd claims company having wasted a lot in fees with 2 others. Ive printed off letters here and on other forum sites and given him copies and hes going to do it himself now. Then at least he will also know how its going. All of my agreements arrived quickly where there were any - except I asked my solicitor to do it for me (but not again after he failed to read the act and send the statutory £1 off with the request). So Ive now started again hoping where we have an agreement the card companies may try to alter it having already got one copy they may think I havent got it from my solicitor and atempt to alter it. I sign over my typed name to help defeat attempts to cut and paste or otherwise lift my signature. With MBNA and Capital One 'application' forms arrived in MBNA's case the financial conditions (they omitted 'terms') need a magnifying glass to read and they are not given equal prominence and thus according to the act none compliant in these respects. Then the APR was missed from purchases but exhaustively dealt with in cash advances - so not sure wheher an APR is needed but it is then its prob. not enforecable. Cap Ones was also an application form again I dont know for sure whether an application form can also be an agreement. But terms and conds. were to reverse but no copy provided so cant tell as yet whether its correct. I hope a distinction can be successfully argued over whether an application form can be an agreement as if so I have two that can be argued with in this respect. I have a further 7 cards where I'm hoping to find unenforceable agreements - in the case of HSBC there isnt one, Alliance and Leicester none, Mint none, Monument a reply card whivh has no interest rte on it no terms and conditions but which annoyingly my solicitor thinks I will fail to convince the judge on in my favour ! So im looking at taking this over myself as he cant be right. Any others here won any court cases yet or got any pointers ?

Hi - Re credit cards i.e. running account agreements - ive read on here about credit limits, agreements versus application forms, judgement in the Ocway case re credit limit being specified (but was that not relating to fixed sum loan rather than a credit card ?) right to cancel, payment information etc and my own judgement is when reading the act that if any of the few main points are missing its unenforceable and a court cannot make it enforceable if one or more of the key features specfified in the CCA are not present. But it is very negative and disheartening talking to my solicitor who is probably learning about it as much as I am to hear he thinks an example of my Monument 'agreement' which is headed 'reply card' has no statement of interest, credit limit, or any terms and conditions attached to it be held as proabably not going to succeed in court. Can he be right ? I havent ot a scanner to scan it in unfortunately. Itr makes asking him to look at my Egg agreement a none starter where they have complied with the act in many respects but have no notice to cancel - I know in this case it can be posted with card but so far have nor produced that bit yet. Any ideas or comments anyone ?

Since 1985 a long time ago ! they may have altered the administration of the account over such a long time - I suggest you write again and ask them to clarify it - if its not based on the agreement signed then I would guess it could be subject to a further agreement a copy of which you require.

Hi - the right to cancel is alo required but creditors can comply by sending this with the credit card.