These companies have now been warned by the Ministry of Justice over their misleading advertising. Claims management businesses warned about misleading marketing claims - Ministry of Justice

Did you send them the letter about just sending the terms and conditions being a breach of the Act and Regulations?

Yeah, why not send them a complaint as it would appear to be an unfair term. If they tell you to bog off you can always take it to the FOS.

Hi and welcome to CAG skylite246. You need to start your own thread to get the appropriate help and advice with this. If you don't know how to start your own thread have a read here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

Yes you certainly should.

Have you filed your claim at court yet?

When was the card taken out? Cap One's credit agreements are usually a copy of the application form which contains none of the prescribed terms required in an enforceable credit agreement.

These are your prime suspects for non enforceable agreements. The Lloyds/AMEX may be too if it was an application form. Not at all. Quite the opposite really. The CCA request is simply a legal request. If the company concerned does not have an enforceable agreement you have far more negotiating room with them.

Yes it is an enforceable agreement as it contains the APR, credit limit and the mimimum payments.

Yep. Well done Robert

Hi and welcome to CAG. Unfortunately the advice that the CAB gave you wasn't the greatest. What you need to do is send BCW a letter on your mums behalf stating that the debt is statute barred and any further contact will be considered as harassment. Use template M here. Send it recorded delivery and do not sign the letter. As you have also received a telephone call I would send this letter too http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/37006-harassment-telephone-response-letter.html No, absolutely not. Debt collectors have no legal powers at all. Only a court can send bailiffs to your home and they would only do this in exceptional circumstances. The whole point of a debt being statute barred is that no enforcement action can be taken. Probably by using tracing companies and breaking the data protection act in some way. You have lots of rights. You have the right to receive no further contact regarding this account once you inform them that no payment will be forthcoming. Any further contact once you have informed them of this would be harassment which is a criminal offence. I would also make a complaint to your local Trading Standards about this companies tactics as well as a complaint to the OFT under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 questioning BCW's fitness to hold a consumer credit license (enclose copies of any threatening letters and emphasise that this is causing your mother a great deal of distress). You may also wish to get your local MP involved.

Did they respond to your letter?

Are you having trouble listening to it Lex?

I would just wait until Monday before sending them anything.

Do you have enough equity in your property to pay the inhibition in full after fees, etc for selling your property?

You could write back to them and say thanks for the annual statement but where's the copy of the agreement I asked for. Roughly what sort of figure is still outstanding on the loan account?

Is it actually just terms and conditions they are sending or is it a blank credit agreement e.g. without signatures?

No, because you would be transfering your interest in the property to your husband. It would be recalled, but your close enough. What type of decree was it e.g. small claims, summary cause, ordinary cause?

Just explain to the OFT how 1st Credit have treated you and all the things they have failed to do, etc. You don't need to quote the law to them as the OFT will know which laws/regulations 1st Credit are choosing to ignore. While they can't take on individual complaints what they can and will do is use your complaint and others like it to assess 1st Credits fitness, both in terms of holding a consumer credit license and in terms of any fines the OFT may impose on them.

A Notice of Inhibition does prevent you from selling your heritable property (your home). However it's not like in England where a charge has been placed against your property, it's simply a case of you have been inhibited from transfering the title to your property until the debt is paid off. Once the debt has been paid off the inhibition is removed. The inhibition can be applied for as soon as they have the decree against you even if a time order was awarded and you have not missed a payment and indeed in these circumstances you wouldn't actually have had time to miss one. Remember an inhibition is on an individual and just stops you from doing something rather than a charge on your property as in England. It only really heavily effects you if you need to move to a new job because obviously you can't sell your home and buy a new one somewhere else.

The law in Scotland is different yes. For a start we don't have CCJ's. The assignment issues I quoted however are to do with English law. This is information that was received from HM Courts Services. They did not state why, only that you can not sell off a CCJ unless ordered by the court.

Service is deemed to occur after 2 business days (Saturdays and Sundays are not classed as business days) by first class post, so I would imagine you can add a couple more days for second class post.

As is the one below: If a payment is made after a 6-year gap, the Limitations Act 1980 is still enforceable and the debt remains Statute Barred. However, in this instance, it is unlikely that you will be able to claim back any payments made after the 6 years from the creditor because you still owe them the money.

It's 18 days from the SD being served, so from when you received it.

Regarding getting your money back, when a debt is time barred neither party can take action through the courts. You may however be able to apply some pressure through the OFT and FOS and perhaps get the money back that way (probably doubtful unless you can prove unfair collection practices were used but still worth a try).