DLC/Hillesden Citi Card please help

[spamheed]

as for the statements, it is not unusual for a DCA to claim full ownership of a debt, their response is the giveaway, if they refer at all to "our client" you know that they are merely acting as agents for the OC.

 

If you can deal with the OC and make payments directly to them, that's always a better option, no undue charges applied by someone you never entered into an agreement with. it also offers the possibility to screw over a DCA. (which is always a good thing)

[Crolthtroll]

Hi Spamheed,

 

Recieved a reply from Hillesden saying they are requesting the CCA from Citi Cards and will get back to me in 21 days or give an update. Should I do anything further and can I assume they have put any court action on hold for now. Also recieved another statement from Citi cards? I will carry on with the payments of £100. At least they can't send me my application (seen other threads where this seems to have happened) as I never filled in an application for the card in the first place. What do they mean by if they can not obtain a signed copy they will supply a true copy etc.

 

thanks

 

 

El.

[Edz11]

There are three types of agreement.

 

1) A signed agreement with prescribed terms

2) A signed agreement without prescribed terms

3) A unsigned agreement with prescribed terms that they have made up

 

they seem to mean that if they can't find 1 they will forward 3.

 

Sorry, I meant "reconstructed" - not "made up". That would be illegal.

 

Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981

 

 

interpretation

of Part I PART I

 

Subject to subsection

 

 

 

(2) below, in this Part of this Meaning of

 

Act

 

 

 

"instrument" means— instrument

 

(a) any document, whether of a formal or informal character;

 

 

(b) any stamp issued or sold by the Post Office;

 

 

© any Inland Revenue stamp ; and

 

 

(d) any disc, tape, sound track or other device on or in

 

 

which information is recorded or stored by mechanical,electronic or other means.

 

(2) A currency note within the meaning of Part II of this Act is not an instrument for the purposes of this Part of this Act.

 

 

(3) A mark denoting payment of postage which the Post Office authorise to be used instead of an adhesive stamp is to be treated for the purposes of this Part of this Act as if it were a stamp issued by the Post Office.

 

 

(4)

 

 

 

In this Part of this Act "Inland Revenue stamp" means

 

a stamp

 

 

 

as defined in section 27 of the Stamp Duties Manage- 1891 38.

 

ment Act

 

 

 

1891.

 

9.—(1)

 

 

 

An instrument is false for the purposes of this Part of this Act—

 

(a)

 

 

 

if it purports to have been made in the form in which it is made by a person who did not in fact make it in that form ; or

 

(b)

 

 

 

if it purports to have been made in the form in which it is made on the authority of a person who did not in

 

 

fact authorise its making in that form ; or

©

 

 

 

if it purports to have been made in the terms in which it is made by a person who did not in fact make it in those terms; or ...

[MARTIN3030]

Hillesden are debt buyers and buy from Citi.

Dlc is affiliated - a collection arm of Hillesden.

Citi financial have proved throughout to be a company that does not take things on the chin....in 2006 and early 2007 they engineered tactics that they thought would take them outside having to make refunds.At the end of the day CAG met them head on and threw the book at THEM.If there was unlawful penalty charges on your account and you agreed a repayment plan it does not mean that in 2008 you are still agreed that you were 100% responsible for the debts.

If you have made it clear that you dispute the debts then they are obligated under the rules to suspend any further recovery attempts to chase payments although if you can afford to pay the arrangement you should continue to do so.

As a Citi claimant myself (ongoing for almost 18 months I know a little about these people )...You need to be informed as to how to proceed from here....and also how to respond to their next move.

I dont want to say much else here.....I know they will be reading this so will instead pm you.

[renegotiation]

The common opinion on this forum is to continue paying until they are in default ie after 12 working days.

 

My opinion, if there is a reasonable chance that they are going to provide you with something is to play safe by waiting until after the 30 day deadline has passed.

 

I am sure there are those who don't agree and as I said, this is merely my opinion, the thinking being, if it takes them say 20 days to provide the form, then at least you haven't burnt any bridges and acted hastily and it appears that you have merely made a legal request.

 

 

If however you wait until the full 30 days have expired, you have given them every opportunity and have acted reasonably by allowing them almost 2 months to comply before withdrawing payments, if they are of the belief that you will continue to pay, it would also make them believe that they can take their sweet time over the whole business. I believe the phrase is "lull them into a false sense of security"

 

At the end of the day, it is very much your own decision, and you can legally withold payment when they are in default, ie after the 12 working day deadline has passed, or any time after that deadline

 

If you are indeed disputing the debt I would withdraw payment as soon as the law allows. I fail to see any benefit to 'lulling them into a false sense of security'? :???: Everyone has an opinion as you said though.

 

 

 

In fact, ***and this I am unsure of***, can't you just withdraw payment immediately upon dispute of the debt without waiting the 12 working days?

[spamheed]

I believe asking someone to produce documentation and then witholding payment when it wasn't produced immediately would be the far extreme from my own opinion and equally unreasonable.

 

the 12 + 2 was I believe introduced in the interests of "fair play" to allow a Creditor sufficient time to access for instance archives which may not be readilly accessible.

[renegotiation]

But I am correct from a 'legal' perspective, regardless of your personal view, or not? As I said, I am uncertain. I may try and look it up later if no one gives a firm response.

[spamheed]

I believe asking someone to produce documentation and then witholding payment when it wasn't produced immediately would be the far extreme from my own opinion and equally unreasonable.

 

the 12 + 2 was I believe introduced into the Consumer credit act in the interests of "fair play" to allow a Creditor sufficient time to access for instance archives which may not be readilly accessible.

 

so therefore no, you wouldn't be allowed to legally withold payment until they had gone into default, ie. the legally allowed timescale of 12 working days had passed

[Crolthtroll]

Thank you all for your help. I look forward to your PM Martin3030 as I need all the informed help I can get. I don't know how many late payment charges they added to my balance but there definitely were some.

 

El

[Crolthtroll]

Hi All,

 

I have had no further correspondence from Hillesden as yet. What's the next step? I am continuing to pay, should I now send them a SAR so I can find out what if any unlawful charges have been applied to the debt?

 

 

thanks again,

 

 

El

[MARTIN3030]

2 threads merged to keep everything together.

[Crolthtroll]

Hi,

 

I have been Reading through lot's of posts re CCA requests and am a little unclear about exactly what the DCA should be sending, do they have to send a copy which includes my signature, if not how do I know if they really have a copy or are just bluffing by sending me a copy of just any old agreement.

 

thanks El

[The GodMother]

if you get a letter back from them which they enclose a cca then post it up here and we will let you know if it is correct. Its Best you join

photobucket.com to upload your document they send you It is a Free site.

[Crolthtroll]

Hi Guy's

 

12 month down the line and I have not recived my CCA still getting a letter every 21 days (I have kept them all). I have not made any payments for 11 months only got one call in that time, my repsonse was to call Mr Locke direct (and I spoke to him:eek:) He assured me that it was a training error and I had slipped back into the system somehow:cool:.

 

I am worried though, is my debt growing all the time I am not paying and say they found my agreement would I end up owing more than I could possibly pay in a life time?

 

thanks

 

El

[Goldlady]

As far as I understand it they can't add interest or charges while the account is in dispute as they haven't found your CCA. So if they do miraculously find it you should be in exactly the same position as you were - but the more time that passes, the more unlikely it will turn up.

 

Keep filing the letters.

[Pinky69]

Mr Locke will tell you anything. Chances are they bought this debt without any agreement and now they cannot find one. He even tried to send me a letter from another company which had a false address on it - that company did not have its credit licence renewed in November 2008. The best laugh of all is that he sent a newspaper cutting and tried to make out that was an agreement! - eejit. If there is no agreement don't pay them another penny and don't listen to his drivel on the phone.

[Crolthtroll]

Hi Everyone,

 

Does anyone know what would be likely to happen should they suddenly come up with your agreement! I am on about year 2 now still waiting for my agreement started receiving calls again but promptly told them to Speak to their Mr Locke. Still worried though just in case I and up owing them twice as much in the end.

 

thanks

 

 

Eli

[Pinky69]

If they come up with an agreement and it is enforceable (unlikely after 2 years) then you have to pay it, telling them they are getting £1 a month.

[Crolthtroll]

Hi,

 

Got a call from DLC yesterday saying they have sent me my agreement which I should recieve in the next few days. Has anyone else out there had a call like this. They seem to call me every six months or so and I usually just say account in dispute if no agreement please leave me alone. What do I do if it turns out to be my agreement?

[Crolthtroll]

So The Shadow, are you saying CCA requests are a watse of time now, I'm confused I've been waiting for mine for 3 years. Will I end up owing more than I could ever pay back in a life time due to added interest etc. Please can someone clarify the current situation on this, will an unsigned reconstructed agreement be aceppted by the courts as proof of my agreement to the terms within? Sorry if I'm being a bit dim but I really would like to know of the possible consequences of my actions and if those consequences have changed since I first started down this path.

 

 

thanks

 

 

Eli

[the_shadow]

So The Shadow, are you saying CCA requests are a watse of time now, I'm confused I've been waiting for mine for 3 years. Will I end up owing more than I could ever pay back in a life time due to added interest etc. Please can someone clarify the current situation on this, will an unsigned reconstructed agreement be aceppted by the courts as proof of my agreement to the terms within? Sorry if I'm being a bit dim but I really would like to know of the possible consequences of my actions and if those consequences have changed since I first started down this path.

 

 

thanks

 

 

Eli

 

Hi,

 

Unfortunately over time things change and the test cases have changed certain things. In an ideal world the abscense of a signed agreement should mean game over however the judiciary are certainly coming down on the side of creditors more and if you dont defend correctly or get the wrong judge then yes you could lose despite not having a s78 response.

 

As Coledog has stated they have opened the can of worms that is the CPR and hence you could if you wished send a CPR letter requesting the information. Citicards have always been slack in releasing information, indeed it seems they have tried to abstain from even giving the info to their own DCA's in the past.

 

S.

[coledog]

The court system at the moment is a lottery and judges are siding on claimants who can produce something like an application form and statements. It also depends on the amount of money owed and the assets of the claimant.

 

In many cases, they are banking on getting a default judgement and the ignorance of the defendant. Any one who has found CAG is in a better position as you will not lie down and take this and always put up a reasonable defence which in many cases, sees them off. The lack of Citi documents is very relevant in this

[Crolthtroll]

Thanks for your replys. I am worried now as I had a call last week from DLC saying they had sent my agreement, it has not arrived yet but I have the feeling it's going to be a reconstructed one. I just read Shazza50's clash with them and she was very unlucky and now it seems they have gone for broke. Can you apeal should you get a DJ that choses to ignore the point of law that states you can not grant a judgement in favour of the claimant without seeing an enfocreable agreement.

[the_shadow]

Thanks for your replys. I am worried now as I had a call last week from DLC saying they had sent my agreement, it has not arrived yet but I have the feeling it's going to be a reconstructed one. I just read Shazza50's clash with them and she was very unlucky and now it seems they have gone for broke. Can you apeal should you get a DJ that choses to ignore the point of law that states you can not grant a judgement in favour of the claimant without seeing an enfocreable agreement.

 

 

I'm sorry to say there has never been such a point of law.

 

County court is based on probabilities not certainties and therefore they have to convince a judge 51% that you have had the money AND signed an enforceable agreement AND complied with all regulations and statutes to obtain money after a default has occured. You have to likewise convince the judge 51% that they have not and did not.

 

S.

[Crolthtroll]

Well recieved the letter from DLC all they have sent is statements going back to 2006> Should I ignore them as no agreement, not sure what to do next please help?