if ur loan was before 2006 then it has no effect.

if they are a DCA then if u offer to make a payment they have to accept, if they have refuse, which u say they have done, they are going against what the OFT guidelines on debt collecting, keep all letters and copy them, file a report on to OFT and TS, and tell them you've done so.

I've waited long enough for an answer to my complaint after writing a second letter to them, i gave 14 days notice to reply and nothing, i've put in a complaint to the complaint dept but that'll take decades and the bank are still thinking it won't come to much.

what i need now is a particular of claims expert to help me out now, i'm going to court with the UTCC 1999 asap.

i've been following this thread with great interest, and fair enough i've not read all 339 pages of it, but i will get around to it slowly. the main reason is what tamadus say's is to debate on the issues of the CCA 1974 and it's complexities. when this is all said and done i think a few beers will be in order for the pioneers of this thread.

she should have just phone the police, they were there without express permission.

no problem, have subscribed to this, will help out when i can, wish your friend good luck and that she's in good hands.

always liked blue peter though, amazing what they could make, suppose they did take a leaf out of the BP book and try and say "here's one i made earlier" the only good thing that will come out of this at the end is they tighten up their agreements so that they comply with the reg's. would be better for everyone, but i'm sure it'll take a while to filter through their collective heads.

from what i've read in your letter, that should put a stop to it, the only thing i would leave out though is the account in dispute bit, if you look over the agreements and the insurance, and find something wrong ie: the insurance being missold, write to them explaining that, you feel that it's been missold etc etc and that you intend to dispute the agreement in a court of law over such mis-selling etc. that should make them investigate it and put it in dispute.

my question is though, if that's what they send out, surely they must know somewhere in the collective that it falls way short of what a properly executed agreement is.

How can they be so stupid, or did they hope the consumer would be so dumb and stay blissfully asleep and unaware of the reg's in the CCA 1974.

no problem, every little helps, and that's what this site is about. will post more when i know more ok.

i guess the ultra short bit means it's missing the prescribed terms and all the important bits needed in a properly executed agreement.

lol, ur only supposed to make comments like that when ur out of range lol, serves u right.

i'd go over the agreement's carefully to see if they are properly executed or unenforceable, do they contain all the prescribed terms under the OFT guidelines for consumer contracts, have a look in the cca thread, also in sure under the UTCC reg's if there is an unfair term/terms ie the charges then i'd argue that the contract/agreement is void unless it can operate without the unfair term in place. would take a court to judge that one though. maybe one of the mod's would help better than i can but at least it's a good start.

first of all get the telephoning to stop, write to them and say that all communication to be done in writing, under the telephony act 1949 which makes it an offence after requesting such an action to continue phone calls. also under the communications act 2003 but i'm not so sure what bit of it is. something to do with harassment. i'll look it up.

as for the door step visit ur friend has the right to refuse them, meaning they can't just show up as they like, they have to apply for your friends permission. if they show up uninvited, tell them they better leave or get lifted by the police. there is alot of help in the debt action group.

CCA request them under the consumer credit act 1974, should stall them and even better if they can't produce anything. best i can think of at the mo.

this is extra ammo to be used against them i'm sure, yet this same process is going on with all the other banks too, maybe an admission from one will affect the other cases against the other banks too.

i'll be looking it over very carefully when i do eventually get it, i'm sure it'll be produced if it goes to court.

i took out the loan in early 2005 i think, can't quite be sure.

well the clock is ticking on them, after 30 day anything they do will be criminal and i won't hestiate in reporting them and even go so far as to have them charged with harassment. i'll deal with their dog's first though and set blair oliver and scott straight.

i'll type that up once i get back from work tonight and let them know where they stand and all that, and any other requests from them to pay up will be politely refused until their clients HBOS have complied.

so i should just write to them advicing the DCA that their clients are now in default and therefore any action to enforce the debt ie: passing it on to the DCA can't enforce it unless they comply with the CCA request.

hi folk, i've sent off a CCA request to the HBOS back on the 26th april, which put's them in default as off now, only to recieve a letter from the DCA Blair oliver and scott asking for payment of the loan. telephoned them up saying that as their clients haven't produced a copy of the agreement then they can't enforce the debt. they asked for me to send them a cpoy of the letter so that their legal dept can look it over, i've a sneaky feeling they are time wasting. i'll sent them the letters anyway as they still have time to fulfill it. any advice would be welcome.

i'm subscribing to this, very interesting reading and can't wait to see the outcome. go get them.

well said, after all this is what we are after, a ruling against the banks, i'm one for it and support those who take a stand for it too. i'm not all that confident about it myself but i do get the help and support and advice from those who have. this back stabbing and knocking down isn't what we need, but we certainly need more people to force the banks into court.

ouch

in fact after reading the whole case, this has to do with interest applied to cheques, it seems barcley's are clutching at straws here, how can they apply this same ruling to their Unlawful bank charges and which they also applied interest to said charges unlawfully gained. IMO i'd go to court and say that to the judge and leave the burden of proof at barcleys door to prove their charges are fair and lawful.