Whats their game? Today I received a secured credit agreement to sign this was to be returned to: broker rec,bishop house,abbeyfields,lenton,notts bg7 2sz. My story 1] £15k secured loan @20%apr early 2008 never missed any payments 2] late 2009 requested copy of credit agreement 3] told to send a pound and they will send it 4] did not take further as dont want to damage credit file (2 years i'm prime again) 5] today got new agreement to sign for £16k @17%apr 6] settlement of 2008 loan would be £13k so if I sign this (no chance) would they in theory send me £3k This shouts of panic we dont have the agreement does it not?

that smiley you added stops the link working Petition to: reduce the time Credit reference agencies hold data for to 3 years. | Number10.gov.uk :):):):):):):)

Got a great answer from cagger diddydick in the dodgy dn thread and if I can understand it anyone can. I quote "the creditor is BOUND BY HIS WORDS Firstly, if the creditor did not comply with s77/79 then any action he takes whilst he remains in default is unlawful (including trying to enforce/terminate the account) However, even if he does have a bona fide executed agreement and you have breached one of its terms he may not end (terminate) the agreement and demand payment of the full balance of the account if you are in arrears UNLESS he first complies with the (STRICT) requirements regarding the issuing of the DN If the DN is faulty, instead of LAWFULLY demanding that you pay the full balance of the account, he has instead UNLAWFULLY terminated the agreement. the MAIN BENEFIT of a credit card agreement to the consumer is that it allows you to borrow money and repay it in installments of you own choosing (subject to a minimum) clearly , removing that benefit from you destroys the agreement as it then becomes one sided The law TOLERATES such law breaking and when this happens it gives the "injured party" two options:_ 1/ the IP can say to the creditor "sod off pal that is unlawful and i dont accept it so i intend to insist that you fulfil the agreement you signed up to 2./ thats not a nice thing to do pal, and clearly you have demonstrated by your unlawful action that you have no respect for me or the sanctitiy of the agreement and clearly our relationship has broken down, therefore yes ok i accept the agreement is now (unlawfully) rescinded that means i am no longer bound by any of its terms or as john cleese would say it is an ex agreement it is no more its gone to meet its maker it has gone to that great filing cabinet in the sky the creditor who was bound by his words unlawfully rescinded the agreement and it came to and end and you accepted that (by your words or deeds) and did not want it to continue, therefore the only way he can ressurect it is to get you to agree and you are hardly likely to want to do that thus he cannot issue another DN because there is no agreement to default- it ended. "

They seem to be ignorant to the fact the default notice is invalid as it does not comply to the prescribed terms of the CCA1974. Sorry to repeat but what will your statement be if the creditor asks the judge to issue a second DN. Are you expecting the judge to say no they cannot, because he may not. I have a low opinion of these judges and think they live in a bubble, so you will need an answer prepared , I am also seeking this. good luck for next week, very interested in this one as similar to mine.

I will define success as when I post on here that I have the default (oct 2005) removed from my file. I'm also concerned about others who think they have a legitimate reason to suppress legitimate comments in a forum. p.s I hate BT, should be bankrupt anyday.

If I agreed to the terms of the service CONTRACT, a written agreement of material evidence (the written contract itself) is needed to prove the actual terms at the time the agreement was struck. There is no written contract, so there is no evidence, so no right to report my data. Time will tell, I wont rollover, I never lose.

They have sent the last bill (oct 2005)and several itemised bills, although the surname is incorrect. Dont fancy taking them to court as I have heard horror stories of losing and paying 20k costs

debtforget, thats the answer i thought " a long up hill battle" I dont see how they can say i entered a agreement with them when they have no paper work to substantiate this, so in court I would surely win. Maybe I should register a default to them under the goods of service act 1982 and reply that i dont have to provide evidence of debt, this is mental. What do you think the ico would say,, also the debt on my cra file is under a name I have never used(quite similar to mine though)

fredbasset quote "You will have agreed to them sending your payment information to the credit reference agencies when you agreed to the contract." When did i agree to the contract? where is the proof? I never agreed so by law they cannot do it, would a letter to the ico help me

Alexifa did you get anywhere with this. Can they register a default with no CCA, I thought I needed to agree for them to report my data to the CRA with a signature. look at my issue if you get chance http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/222691-reply-received-cca-request.html#post2464960

okay, read it,,,,, so how can they register a default when I did not enter into a credit agreement allowing them to report my data? I thought they could only report to a credit reference agency if I signed an agreement. also the name they have registered the debt in is not mine(similar though)

thanks

hi I noticed a default on my credit file, (surname name mispelt, but similar to mine?), so I wrote to HFO the debt collector registering the debt and asked for a CCA and default notice and if they dont have it to remove the default as they are legally not entitled to do so, also said name was wrong too! They have sent this back quoting goods and service act 1982, I have a inkling this is BS so I need a fight back letter. Thanks for looking

Seems april 2007 is a significant date in that the consumer credit act was amended so that if an agreement does not comply with the prescribed terms, then it is still valid, so this applies to all agreements after april 2007. Would not want people to go to court and loose on this point as I have read significant costs are involved if you lose.

great going to send letter asking for agreement?