Mint-Moorcroft-now First Credit !!!!

[humbleman]

I really don't understand why people bother with the FOS (or in other words FOB off) they are run by the financial institutions.

[BARFLY]

The FOS have stated that it's up to a court to determine the enforceability. Invite Mint to take you to court to enforce the debt! Quote the relevant sections of the CCA once more and ask them to point out the prescribed terms on the "application". From reading other posts i'd guess either they or their sidekicks will huff and puff all the way to the court house and then not show. If they do show you'll have a watertight defence put together with the help of the more knowledgable contributors to this site.

[creditcardmug]

Ive read exactly the same thing on here many times from many different posters, the FOS have no power/will to do anything, this is why the DCAs have no fear of them at all and happily send you a claim form when ever you complain.

The oft and trading standards appear to be not much better

[europa16]

Another reply from the adjudicator's manager, after I replied back to their letter that I was unhappy.

I'll just post a few snippets..

 

"The Financial Ombudsman Service does not have an enforcement function under the Consumer Credit Act.."

So what exactly do they do for the consumer? Apparently, not much

 

"It is not our role to say whether your agreement with RBS was properly executed or not. Nor can we say if a court will enforce the agreement."

 

 

"It is not in dispute that you have had the benefit of the funds which make up the balance of your credit card account. So, in my view it is reasonable for RBS to try and recover the outstanding debt. I also consider that RBS is entitled to charge interest on the balance."

This totally flies in the face of OFT guidelines on debt recovery when an account is in dispute.

 

" This service cannot interfere in the legitimate exercise of any business' commercial judgement - unless there is evidence of maladministration. This would include any decisions RBS takes regarding how it goes about recovering the debt. Therefore, I am unable to say that RBS should not have passed your debt to a recovery agent."

Again, breach of OFT guidelines, whilst RBS have an APPLICATION FORM with no precribed terms within it.

 

When are they going to grow a pair, and look at these complaints serioulsy. They also think it's okay to be sending this data to the CRAs. Is there any advice for making the FOS sit up and take notice, or shall I just wait for RBS to make their next move? I'm trying to get the defaults on my credit file removed, and this is one of them. RBS can't even get the account number right on that 8-)

 

Dawn

[Having_A_Knightmare]

If you are having problems with Trading Standards make a complaint to the Councils Chief Executive.

They have to respond then

[europa16]

At the moment I am dealing with the FOS, so TS isn't a high priority for me at the moment. But I will be in touch with them soon.

 

I've been looking through the terms and conditions and the application form again, and I noticed something which I'm not sure will help me. Within the application form, under the declaration heading, there is a statement - "I accept and agree to be bound by the general conditions applying to the card and set out separately...", but these conditions are set out in the T&Cs which were sent out separately (what I signed was a marketing mailshot, which you fill in, lick and send back).

 

I signed 6 days before RBS stamped (signed?) the doc, and I'm not sure when the card was sent out, but I assume the T&Cs came with it.

 

Looking at the regs concerning the cancellation of CCA agreements, it states that you can cancel within 5 days after you receive the second copy of the agreement which the creditor is obliged to send you.

 

So, are RBS saying they sent another copy of my application form with the terms and conditions, as they mistakenly think it's an agreement? I don't think so.

 

This probably can do nothing towards my argument, but it did get me thinking...

 

I don't want to sound desperate to the FOS, but I'm not sure what else I can throw into the bowl to convince them that RBS are wrong :-? and get them off their fence. They want a reply by 3rd September.

[europa16]

Actually, what I am thinking of doing now is accept that RBS have fulfilled their end, in supplying what they think is a properly executed credit agreement (I know it's not), and see if they wish to take a chance in court on a totally unenforceable agreement. FOS have stated it would be up to the courts to decide, so let them

 

I hope I'm not doing the wrong thing here, let me know if you do, please.

[Having_A_Knightmare]

The T&C have to be part of the Document.

They cannot be seperate.

 

If they were not on the back of the application form you are OK.

 

My experiance with Natwest/RBS is that if they have an application form regardless of the contence they will not back down.

 

I have invited Natwest to take me to Court several times with there application form and to dat ethey have not.

 

HAK

[Duffers Mum]

Europa - I have now got the stage where I have invited my remaining creditors to take me to court if they are so sure they have provided enforceable agreements - application forms, sets of T&C's of todays date etc etc is all any of them have provided, in fact Citi Cards merely sent T&C's and not even an application form. I merely send off the "carry on and do it then" letter to them.

 

Good luck - just remember, they can't have what you haven't got

[europa16]

RBS don't want to play any more, so they've passed the debt to Moorcroft to collect

Had a phone call from Moorcroft today asking for me, and wanting all my details before giving me more information. Didn't give it to them, despite them saying they were from moorcroft (can they do that?) but I guessed it had something to do with this, and told them to put it all in writing and that this account was in dispute with RBS, to which he stated that they'd written to me twice and it was now a legal matter??

 

Anyway, the letter turned up about 20 mins after he rang, and yep, it's RBS.

 

This is what was sent:

 

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd25/europa16/moorcroft.jpg

 

That doesn't give me much time to get a reply back off to them.

 

I am so annoyed with this, the FOS haven't totally finished with their investigation yet, and haven't replied to my last email, either.

 

not happy

[creditcardmug]

Moorcroft are complete idiots, and have no knowledge or interest in the law they are trying to use against us, send them this, edit to suit,

 

Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd

 

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY OR ANY COMPANY YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

Dear Sir or Madam,

Your Reference:

 

I refer to your letter of DATE, I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to yourselves, as it is in dispute with the xxxxxxxxx and has been since DATE.

Not only is this a breach of OFT collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998.

My letter to Bank of Scotland dated DATE outlined the fact that the documents they had sent to me do not conform to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and to date I have received nothing further to remedy this.

As xxxxxxxxxxxx are now in default of my Consumer Credit Act request, and OFT Collection Guidelines, I consider this account to be in SERIOUS DISPUTE.

As you are aware while my Consumer Credit Act request remains in default enforcement action is NOT permitted, under s127 this constitutes a complete defence at law.

Now I would respectfully suggest that this account is returned to the xxxxxxxxx for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities.

If Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd chooses to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action.

After taking advice, I am of the opinion that any continued pursuit is in violation of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well as breaching a number of the OFT Collection Guidelines

I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished.

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

I look forward to hearing from you in writing, as this is the only method by which I am prepared to respond.

Yours faithfully

[europa16]

CCM, I must have read your mind as that's pretty much the same I have just written in my reply to them I also added that I'll not speak to them and to put everything in writing from now on.

 

Lord knows what the muppets will send back. I'm expecting they'll try ringing again tomorrow, expecting me to go through their security questions again - erm....nope, don't think so

[BelstarBomb]

Hi Europa,

 

I am having the same problems with RBS!

 

Please see the attached link

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/154580-can-someone-look-rbs.html

 

Will you let me know how you get on and I will do likewise

 

Cheers,

 

BB

[europa16]

No probs, BB. I'll take a look at your thread now, and update mine as and when

[europa16]

Moorcroft actually sent me a non-standard threat-o-gram. I feel privileged

 

Apparently Moorcroft have been in contact with RBS, who have stated that the FOS ruled in THEIR favour, therefore they want their money.

 

The FOS ruled that RBS could chase me for the money (against OFT guidelines, methinks), and that RBS complied with the CCA request (well, if they think that application form is their agreement, so be it) but they certainly did not rule on the enforceability of the agreement. I'm still waiting for the final response from the FOS 4 weeks after my phone call with them.

 

Is it even worth me writing back to Moorcroft telling where that statement, and the whole enforceability issue falls down. Or should I wait for the FOS to get in touch, and find out exactly what they said the RBS?

 

I could really do without this going all the way to court (I shake like a leaf at the slightest altercations:rolleyes:) but I will let it if I have to.

[willtheywontthey]

similar situation except I gpt a reply from RBS (Mint and N Union) stating they were making use f some Clause 25 which allows them to not release my information as a result of my SAR!

 

FOS will be useless. Have complained to ICO but have not got much hope. Application form is not enforecable but it seems we are open to attack by DCAs forever and a day unless they take us to court?

 

Can we go to court and say 'this CCA is not enforceable'? Does that not make more sense? (This is where I get lost!)

[creditcardmug]

Cluase 25 of which ACt?

[willtheywontthey]

without wanting to hijack thread... could be what RBS will be doing next though after a CCA request and after a SAR..

[bathgatebuyer]

Euorpa, I've just made a similar complaint to the FOS about Sainsburys not providing a CCA which contains all the prescribed terms and conditions. They've told me they are waiting to pas this to an Adjudictor although going by the responses you've received from the FOS, I'm not holding out much hope for them to take this matter seriously. How disappointing - and that's with the Office of Fair Trading writing to me and telling that the FOS could help in situations such as this.

[BelstarBomb]

Hi,

 

Reading this really gets me angry because it is apparant that all relevant parties such as the ICO, FSO, TS etc will leave everything hanging so the banks ultimately do not have to pay out when legally they should.

 

One thing that mught be worth a try.

 

I'm sure that some of you would have seen or read about the Rankine case which basically sparked all of this. There is a video online when it made th enews in the Midlands and they also interviewed a guy from the CAB. He mentioned that there is a fund set up whereby they will help and assist individuals in court cases.

 

I don't know the ins and outs but if your case is cut and dried then it might be something that they could help you on.

 

Best to google 'Rankine unenforceable debt CCA video' I'm sure it will come up with any combination of that and youshould be able to get the exact terminolgy the guy used to help you.

 

Let me know if it's of any use,

 

Good luck,

 

BB

[europa16]

I wrote to Moorcroft in reply to the letter that says RBS are in the right, stating exactly where the FOS ruled in their favour and where they did not - namely the fact they wouldn't intervene in the legality of the application form.

 

Before this, I found another account number on my Experian credit file that bore no relation to the account number on all my statements. So I SARed RBS (since Experian were useless) and got a nice letter saying they would forward all the data for my account soon (erm, but nothing about this account number thats appeared on my credit file ).

 

I wrote back stating exactly which account number I wanted the data for - the bundle turned up today with the details of the account I already know about Including letters I wrote to RBS and customer notes since the account was put in dispute. There's one comment in there that's recent - that I want to take RBS to court!! What I actually said (and this was to moorcroft in my last letter was that I would happily let them take me to court to get the legality of the application form dealt with once and for all).

 

Are they going to try and use clause 25 to try and get out of supplying me with the data for this ghost account? There's no mention anywhere of this account, nor any mention of the account being handled by CMS Telford, where I'm presuming this account number originates.

 

It must exist, because they haven't denied it - I got one digit wrong in a letter to them a couple of months ago, and they were quick to point out it didn't show on their system.

 

They haven't complied with my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request), sent the wrong details and half of those are missing (only from 2002). Oh, and I'm still not paying them, if all they've got is an application form *sighs*

[europa16]

An update...

 

With regards to the strange RBS card number on my Experian file, it turns out (according to Mint) that it is just an internal encryped number for use with the CRAs.

 

Moorcroft are stiil trying to get me to pay up. So far I've had a request for an income/expenditure balance and repayment proposal - which I said I would pay the grand total of zilch. Don't think they were to happy at that, becasue today I got a nice letter from Midal Legal Services. This goes as follows...

 

LITIGATION WARNING

 

We have been advised that you have failed to reach a repayment agreement with Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd concerning the above account and have been asked to prepare a file for review prior to commencement of any legal action.

 

To prevent further action you muct contact Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited at the following address.

.

.

.

 

Failure to contact Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited by the 09/12/08 may result in the issue of legal proceedings without further notice.

.

.

.

It is then signed my Mr M Dobson (Solicitor).

 

After a little digging, I know this is just another offshoot of Moorcroft, but Mr Dobson is on the Law Society's register. However, it certainly isn't under this company, and is at another address and company name - MLS Solicitors.

 

Anyone got any advice on how to proceed with this one, or should I just send him a "bog off" letter?

 

Perhaps I should point out what he should already know - this debt is unenforceable?

 

Thx :)

 

 

 

 

[europa16]

Well, Midas Legal services make for great bedtime reading at companies house, same directors, dormant accounts, etc

 

I've sent my sod off letter, shall wait and see what comes back...

[upto the eyeballs]

subbing...

[ccman]

Best of luck! You are where I anticipate being sometime inthe new year

 

CCMAN