**thinks- they are attempting to obtain pecuniary advantage by deception in reality, arent they?**

I hear what you say but I don't know that area of law anywhere near well enough to comment.

Pete

I appreciate that, but to say they have NO data regarding my PPI is a nonsense. THEY collect the payments from me each month as part of my repayments of the overall loan. They MUST send that money somewhere - i.e. to the insurer. At the very least, they have to have the policy number or else how could they make payments to the third party? Do they simply collect the money each month & say 'I wonder what this is and where it goes?' Of course they don't, so saying 'we have no data whatsoever regarding th PPI' is a plain untruth. Either that or there isn't a policy & they ARE simply pocketing the payments.

You have to understand what section 7 of the Data Protection Act actually allows a Data Subject to ask for. Data Protection Act S7 is not a "catch-all" to allow you to request absolutely any information, only certain types of data come under the remit of the Data Protection Act.

Under the Data Protection Act the information you are allowed to see must comply with the following:

a) The data is processed automatically.

b) Contained within a "Relevant Filing System" as defined by the DPA

c) Contains your data

d) Does not allow anyone else to be identified unless that other person has given their consent for disclosure to you.

The Act describes the relevant data that it covers thus:

1. - (1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires-

 

"data" means information which-

 

(a) is being processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose,

 

(b) is recorded with the intention that it should be processed by means of such equipment,

 

© is recorded as part of a relevant filing system or with the intention that it should form part of a relevant filing system, or

 

(d) does not fall within paragraph (a), (b) or © but forms part of an accessible record as defined by section 68;

So it may well be that they do have some other information but if it doesn't comply with the above then they do not have to let you have it. For example there might be a box of documents pertaining to your PPI but if the documents are not in a relevant filing system then you don't get to see it.

You could write back and ask them to explain why they have no information, or if they do ask them why they are not prepared to release it to you?

Pete

I take the view, that if the Creditor actually has the true and executed signed credit agreement, then they would have sent you a copy.

 

It may well be that the creditor cannot find the agreement at the moment?

I agree.

However, the fact is that the creditor is in default of the CCA 1974 by not sending the requested doc. copy within the timescale allowed.

No, sorry, you are plain wrong here!

If the lender sent a document, even if it's unsigned and doesn't have a signature box then they HAVE complied. The CCA 1974 was amended by the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1984 (the CNCD), Section 3(1) and (2) [expurgated] of which states:

"(1)...... every copy of an executed agreement........ or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor...... under any provision of the Act shall be a true copy thereof.

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy-

(a) any information included in an executed agreement ..... relating to the debtor......

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature .....

So a "copy" of the agreement, so long as it contains all of the statutory terms and conditions does not need to be signed nor does it need to have any of the debtors details.

IMO sending out a template copy is simply a get-out.

Very likely true but it doesn't change the fact that the lender has complied with S77/78.

Pete

I have had a reply from the head office of my creditor in response to my CCA follow up saying i wanted a 'true SIGNED copy' of my agreement. Basically they have now passed the buck to their 'branch office' and will 'be in touch shortly'. Up to them, they are now past the initial 12 days from my CCA & all i have had is a copy of 'what the agreement would have looked like'.

 

I Have said this before don't accept it send it back and tell them it is not a copy of any agreement you have signed.The 1557 reg only says may withhold the signature if they had the orriginal why would they?

It would be easy enough for them to prove all they would have to do is send a copy of the orriginal signed contract if they had it.

Then if it went to court let them explain why they are wasting court time.

Peter

Peter, I know what you're saying and I don't disagree but lets not muddy the waters please.

Soli2006's question (the first part) referred to compliance with S77/78 of the CCA 1974. His lender has complied with S77/78 as amended by the Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents Regulations. Therefor soli cannot complain to anyone about his lenders non-compliance.

Why a lender would send out a "generic" document rather than a copy of the original is a totally different question and I would ask for a copy of the original also that position. BUT, requesting a copy of the original agreement once a "generic" copy has been supplied falls outside the remit of S77 / 78 and therefore there is no applicable timescale for the document to be supplied within.

Pete

Hi everyone - going off subject a little on one of these questions.

 

I have had a reply from the head office of my creditor in response to my CCA follow up saying i wanted a 'true SIGNED copy' of my agreement. Basically they have now passed the buck to their 'branch office' and will 'be in touch shortly'. Up to them, they are now past the initial 12 days from my CCA & all i have had is a copy of 'what the agreement would have looked like'.

They have complied with your (presumably) Section 77 or 78 request. The Act as modified says that signature boxes, signatures and personal information can be omitted from any copies of documents sent under any section of the Act. So if you have a copy of what the application form would have looked like then they have complied.

You are certainly able to ask for a copy of the original signed and executed agreement, they would have to have this if they went to court anyway, but there is no timescale set out for them to send this; they could take six months if they wanted to.

On another subject - a little off topic - I also have an ongoing S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) with the same company. All they initially sent me was a copy of my statement. So i wrote back saying that i wanted ALL documentation relating to my account, a breakdown of charges, evidence of manual intervention, and details on my PPI agreement. They wrote yesterday simply saying that 'letter £25, phone call £15....' and so on (thats an explanation of charges apparently). And they enclosed a list along the lines of '2/5 - phoned, 5/5 - phoned again, 10/5 - sent letter'........and so on (as 'evidence' of manual intervention). Now - is that 'evidence' or do they have to supply copies of the letters they claim to have sent, and telephone records to prove they phoned - and is there any way they can prove they made a 'personal visit' at all? Surely anyone could write a two page list saying they made calls, wrote letters, paid visits - it doesnt prove they did.

The Data Protection Act S7 states:

" 7. - (1) Subject to the following provisions of this section and to sections 8 and 9, an individual is entitled-

(a) to be informed by any data controller whether personal data of which that individual is the data subject are being processed by or on behalf of that data controller,

(b) if that is the case, to be given by the data controller a description of-

(i) the personal data of which that individual is the data subject,

(ii) the purposes for which they are being or are to be processed, and

(iii) the recipients or classes of recipients to whom they are or may be disclosed,

© to have communicated to him in an intelligible form-

(i) the information constituting any personal data of which that individual is the data subject, and

(ii) any information available to the data controller as to the source of those data, and

(d) where the processing by automatic means of personal data of which that individual is the data subject for the purpose of evaluating matters relating to him such as, for example, his performance at work, his creditworthiness, his reliability or his conduct, has constituted or is likely to constitute the sole basis for any decision significantly affecting him, to be informed by the data controller of the logic involved in that decision-taking."

The important bit is in red. IMO that means copies of letters, memos and telephone recordings or transcripts.

Don't forget that an S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) is not a request for "evidence" of any sort, merely a copy of your data that the company holds. If they say that they have given you all the data they hold then that's that if and until it goes to court.

The other thing is my PPI. Forget for a minute the fact i was told 'no insurance, no loan' - the fact is that they sold me this, wrote it up, got me to sign the forms, took the monthly premiums, and so on. Y et now thet say 'the Personal Protection Insurance is administered by XXXXXX Ltd and as such we have no respinsibilty to give any details. We suggest you contact them directly for this information'. Surely that can't be right? I don't see why i should have to do another S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) (at £10) to the insurers for a policy THEY sold to me & for which THEY collected the premiums.

Again they only have to send you data that they hold about you, they don't have to collect anything from third parties. If they passed your PPI application to a third party then they are probably correct in telling you to contact the third party directly.

Sorry if this isn't what you wanted to read but I must emphasise that a Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) is not a request for legal evidence, merely a request to see the data held on you by the company you have applied to.

Pete

Well, Consumer Direct (Trading Standards) are a complete waste of space!

I emailed a complaint about BLS to them yesterday and got this today:

Dear Number6,

 

Thank you for your email concerning BLS Collections. Your case number for this is XXXXXXX, which should be quoted in any future contact about this issue.

 

Unfortunately, this is outside the remit of what Trading Standards can enforce as there are regulatory bodies for your enquiry. I would recommend that you forward your complaint to the Financial Services Authority (Financial Services Authority) on 0845 606 1234. You may also wish to complain to the Credit Services Association (Home Page) who regulate debt collection agencies on 0191 286 5656.

 

Regards

Consumer Direct West Midlands

 

Pete

Pete thats an identical letter I got from MBUSA

Yes, I got a virtually identical letter from MBNA too.

I really don't know what makes them think they can get away with such tactics!

Pete

So basically youre sayign they can just send you a copy of their agreement - and it doesnt have to be a copy signed by the creditor?

 

Surely not!?!

Yes, quite correct as zoot has already said.

However, this does not absolve the lender from the requirement to have to correct paperwork. Unless they have a properly executed agreement that conforms to Section 61 of the CCA 1974 then they cannot enforce the agreement. You can ask the lender to provide a copy of such an agreement and although they are not compelled to produce it they would be silly not to IMO. If they were to go to court to ask a judge to enforce the agreement and they hadn't produced it to you beforehand the judge would most probably take a dim view of their tactics.

Pete

Hi

 

Well, I filed a MCOL on 5th December and have not heard anymore - I sent copies of the schedule to MCOL to file against my claim but have not sent the bank a copy yet - they had 14days to reply to the claim but I have not heard - what should I do?... should I send copies of the schedule etc - what are the next steps.

 

The MCOL has a judgement button (what is this for)?

 

Any help is appreciated.

 

Xena

Hi

Send a copy of your Schedule of Charges along with a covering letter to your bank (your banks brach address is fine for this).

Pete

Hello,

 

How do I contact tradign standards to advise of a criminal default for a CCA request?

Morning.

Links are all HERE

Pete

Thank you hun:) I am feeling quite Christmaseeee:D

 

Thanks to Number6 again I think I've figured the form out so in the first box I've ticked [without a hearing] and ignored the rest.

 

part A 2. (Intend to apply for an order)....To increase the amount being claimed from £5 (exps) to £455.00 (can't remember I'll have to check that).

3. (reason for the change) Due to further information becoming known to me since the date of my origional claim

 

Part B We wish to rely on..... and I've ticked [the attached]

 

Part C I will include copies of letters from when I sent my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request), my letter of complaint to them and my correspondance to and from the Information Commissioners Office. I will also send copies of the prelim and the LBA so that the Judge all the evidence......sound ok?

 

What do you think?

 

 

Wxxx

That looks fine Willow.

I also like the new avatar!

Pete

TUT TUT..

 

By including "without prejudice" in the box, are you now unable to produce this as evidence in court or does that just relate to the ammount?

I would argue that the "Without Prejudice" header applies only to the amount as it is enclosed in a completely seperate box.

The letter also breaches 2.6(b) of the OFT Debt Collection Guidance Document of July 2003 which section states:

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. contacting debtors at unreasonable times and at unreasonable intervals

b. pressurising debtors to sell property, to raise funds by further

borrowing or to extend their borrowing

Pete

This is the second letter I have received from BLS collections who are acting as "DCA" on behalf of LTSB cards and who are actually a trading name of LTSB.

I replied to the first "standard" collections letter from them with a request for no further contact because LTSB Card Services are in default of my CCA Section 78 Statutory Request.

This second letter came anyway and is interesting on two counts:

1) BLS suggest using "savings, alternative financing or the help of a family member" to clear the debt!!!

2) They are offering a reduced settlement figure [the words used are "....settling your account for a reduced amount"] but then go on to say "On receipt of cleared funds, our Client will advise the Credit Reference Agencies to amend your records to show this account as partially settled..."----- Settled, partially settled,... can't they make up their minds??

Naughty, naughty BLS / LTSB!!

This will be submitted to TS and FSA with a complaint.

Pete

 

One thing. If they put any conditions .... like "...this is full and final settlement, including any future claims in relation to default charges..." is it binding? Or do I have to send it back?? Anyone?

Any condition such as "in full and final settlement" is only valid and enforceable if they give you someting else in return. The clause would have to say something like:

"you agree that this is in full and final settlement of your claim in return for which we will give you a sack of potatoes"

Silly example but the sack of potatoes is (in contract law) referred to as the "consideration"'; others may call it "quid pro quo". It has to be something tangible over and above your settlement.

If they give you consideration then the clause is binding on you. If there's no consideration then it's not binding.

Pete

is this thread still about Dayglo? just want to know how his claim is going but it's all chat

That's all DG's fault.... ask him about it when he gets in

Pete

Hi Guy's....I am now extremely confused !!

 

Initially,2 July 2006 I sent off my Request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a true copy of the signed credit agreement between Morgan Stanley and myself, I included the stat £1 postal order.

 

MS returned my £1.00 PO and sent me a copy of the T&C's, incidentally the issue date of the T&C's was issue TC20 03/00 However, the issue date of my initial T&C's was TC2 08/99 !!

 

Todate, I still have not been sent the requested copy of my signed agreement. MS have therefore committed a criminal offence.

I reported them to Trading Standards a while back and have just spoken again to Trading Standards pressing them fro advice on where I go from here.

 

MS have committed a criminal offence, what are you going to do about it?

the woman at TS although pleasant, did not appear to know!

She is going to ring me back with the correct advice, sometime today.

 

What a ridiculous situation. If any of us had committed a criminal offence, then the police would come around in a flash and probably cart us off to jail. Why would it be any different for a Bank???

 

What do I do now?

 

Love AC

It must be stated again:

A lender does not have to supply a copy of the signed agreement. Under Section 77/78 of the CCA 1974 as amended by the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 a lender can send a "copy" that omits things like signatures, signature boxes or any of the borrowers personal details; in effect they can send out a copy of the T&C's which it appears they've done. In that case they have complied.

But in order to enforce any agreement they have to have and be able to produce the properly executed and signed agreement.

Don't push OFT or TS to prosecute because MS have complied.

You need to write to MS asking for a copy of the agreement that complies with Section 61 of the CCA.

Pete

OK. Now you're getting personal and whatever I state on this site with good intention is always put down by a handful like yourself and No. 6 and the saviour of all, The Watchdog. Apologies to those who have PM'd me with thanks for the private help and to those who have pressed the scales and posted even handed and fair comment. I really can't be bothered with it anymore.

 

Merry Christmas......

This is simply surreal.

I have refrained from commenting but I do disagree with some of the more personal comments posted against you, BUT I resent the accusation that I am putting you down! All that I have ever done is to pick up on points that I find to be inaccurate or misleading and attempt to clarify them. It would appear that because you do not agree with my counter arguments that you then consider this to be "putting you down" in some personal way..??

Oh well.

Pete

Many thanks zootscoot, elsinore and garyH.

That covers point 6 nicely.

Zoot, I did originally apply to the court for the change of claim value via a completed N244 application and LTSB have been notified of the changes. Should I then file a new N1 giving the new value? The court office manager said yesterday that there was no need forme to do anything but I'm not so sure; the direction says that I am "at liberty" to change the value, not that it "has been" changed and that suggests to me that I need to do something rather than just let it lie.

What do you think zoot?

Pete

Even if I was able to provide you with a down to the penny figure of sums recovered, sorry - collected - by bailiffs which feed into the economy, we would still be arguing about what if this and what if that.

Of course we would.

Whomever was of the opinion that you portrayed displayed a fundamental misunderstanding. Any monies collected by bailiffs have an economically neutral effect at best because the act of confiscation removes that spending power from the individual and transfers it to the state, it merely deflects private spending into public spending which in itself tends to distort the entire economy into a depressive state as public spending tends to be less supportive of general wealth creation than private spending.

So at best the effects of the activities of bailiffs on the general economy are economically neutral and at worst are economically negative.

Pete

Oh come on! One was a figure of speech and the other an opinion. Talk about making a mountain out of a mole hill. I'm quite happy to debate issues with you Pete but not if they are irrelevant and you are just sniping for the sake of it.

IMO precision is important. In a legal document a misplaced comma or an ill-chosen word can distort the meaning of an entire document. On here we deal with primarily legal issues so we should all endeavour to portray the correct meaning.

Pete

Again, not worth arguing over. Either accept it or not. Not - clearly. It changes nothing.

That's a vacuous reply; of course it changes things. One of your points was that bailiffs are vital to the UK economy, you presented that as fact. Now it turns out that it is merely an unsubstantiated opinion.

Pete

Interesting how points become not worth arguing over when inaccuracies are pointed out.

Pete

The concept is not mine but that of civil servants.

So you're quoting someone elses unsubstatiated opinion as fact then?

Pete

Fair enough. What would you call picking up on single word in terms of its context when it is clear enough what it means?

Stating that a fine can be "recovered" is not clarity it is disingenuity. It implies that the "transgressor" has somehow spent the fine. I was clarifying that this is not in fact the case.

Pete

Some people wouldn't get any benefits at all if their debts were dealt with this way.

You've just confirmed by this that there are some that shouldn't be pursued because their incomes are too low.

Pete