Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The private submersible industry was shaken after the implosion of the OceanGate Titan sub last year.View the full article
    • further polished WS using above suggestions and also included couple of more modifications highlighted in orange are those ok to include?   Background   1.1  The Defendant received the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) on the 06th of January 2020 following the vehicle being parked at Arla Old Dairy, South Ruislip on the 05th of December 2019.   Unfair PCN   2.1  On 19th December 2023 the Defendant sent the Claimant's solicitors a CPR request.  As shown in Exhibit 1 (pages 7-13) sent by the solicitors the signage displayed in their evidence clearly shows a £60.00 parking charge notice (which will be reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days of issue).  2.2  Yet the PCN sent by the Claimant is for a £100.00 parking charge notice (reduced to £60 if paid within 30 days of issue).   2.3        The Claimant relies on signage to create a contract.  It is unlawful for the Claimant to write that the charge is £60 on their signs and then send demands for £100.    2.4        The unlawful £100 charge is also the basis for the Claimant's Particulars of Claim.  No Locus Standi  3.1  I do not believe a contract with the landowner, that is provided following the defendant’s CPR request, gives MET Parking Services a right to bring claims in their own name. Definition of “Relevant contract” from the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4,  2 [1] means a contract Including a contract arising only when the vehicle was parked on the relevant land between the driver and a person who is-   (a) the owner or occupier of the land; or   (b) Authorised, under or by virtue of arrangements made by the owner or occupier of the land, to enter into a contract with the driver requiring the payment of parking charges in respect of the parking of the vehicle on the land. According to https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/44   For a contract to be valid, it requires a director from each company to sign and then two independent witnesses must confirm those signatures.   3.2  The Defendant requested to see such a contract in the CPR request.  The fact that no contract has been produced with the witness signatures present means the contract has not been validly executed. Therefore, there can be no contract established between MET Parking Services and the motorist. Even if “Parking in Electric Bay” could form a contract (which it cannot), it is immaterial. There is no valid contract.  Illegal Conduct – No Contract Formed   4.1 At the time of writing, the Claimant has failed to provide the following, in response to the CPR request from myself.   4.2        The legal contract between the Claimant and the landowner (which in this case is Standard Life Investments UK) to provide evidence that there is an agreement in place with landowner with the necessary authority to issue parking charge notices and to pursue payment by means of litigation.   4.3 Proof of planning permission granted for signage etc under the Town and country Planning Act 1990. Lack of planning permission is a criminal offence under this Act and no contract can be formed where criminality is involved.   4.4        I also do not believe the claimant possesses these documents.   No Keeper Liability   5.1        The defendant was not the driver at the time and date mentioned in the PCN and the claimant has not established keeper liability under schedule 4 of the PoFA 2012. In this matter, the defendant puts it to the claimant to produce strict proof as to who was driving at the time.   5.2 The claimant in their Notice To Keeper also failed to comply with PoFA 2012 Schedule 4 section 9[2][f] while mentioning “the right to recover from the keeper so much of that parking charge as remains unpaid” where they did not include statement “(if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met)”.     5.3         The claimant did not mention parking period, times on the photographs are separate from the PCN and in any case are that arrival and departure times not the parking period since their times include driving to and from the parking space as a minimum and can include extra time to allow pedestrians and other vehicles to pass in front.    Protection of Freedoms Act 2012   The notice must -   (a) specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates;  22. In the persuasive judgement K4GF167G - Premier Park Ltd v Mr Mathur - Horsham County Court – 5 January 2024 it was on this very point that the judge dismissed this claim.  5.4  A the PCN does not comply with the Act the Defendant as keeper is not liable.  No Breach of Contract   6.1       No breach of contract occurred because the PCN and contract provided as part of the defendant’s CPR request shows different post code, PCN shows HA4 0EY while contract shows HA4 0FY. According to PCN defendant parked on HA4 0EY which does not appear to be subject to the postcode covered by the contract.  6.2         The entrance sign does not mention anything about there being other terms inside the car park so does not offer a contract which makes it only an offer to treat,  Interest  7.1  It is unreasonable for the Claimant to delay litigation for  Double Recovery   7.2  The claim is littered with made-up charges.  7.3  As noted above, the Claimant's signs state a £60 charge yet their PCN is for £100.  7.4  As well as the £100 parking charge, the Claimant seeks recovery of an additional £70.  This is simply a poor attempt to circumvent the legal costs cap at small claims.  7.5 Since 2019, many County Courts have considered claims in excess of £100 to be an abuse of process leading to them being struck out ab initio. An example, in the Caernarfon Court in VCS v Davies, case No. FTQZ4W28 on 4th September 2019, District Judge Jones-Evans stated “Upon it being recorded that District Judge Jones- Evans has over a very significant period of time warned advocates (...) in many cases of this nature before this court that their claim for £60 is unenforceable in law and is an abuse of process and is nothing more than a poor attempt to go behind the decision of the Supreme Court v Beavis which inter alia decided that a figure of £160 as a global sum claimed in this case would be a penalty and not a genuine pre-estimate of loss and therefore unenforceable in law and if the practice continued, he would treat all cases as a claim for £160 and therefore a penalty and unenforceable in law it is hereby declared (…) the claim is struck out and declared to be wholly without merit and an abuse of process.”  7.6 In Claim Nos. F0DP806M and F0DP201T, District Judge Taylor echoed earlier General Judgment or Orders of District Judge Grand, stating ''It is ordered that the claim is struck out as an abuse of process. The claim contains a substantial charge additional to the parking charge which it is alleged the Defendant contracted to pay. This additional charge is not recoverabl15e under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Schedule 4 nor with reference to the judgment in Parking Eye v Beavis. It is an abuse of process from the Claimant to issue a knowingly inflated claim for an additional sum which it is not entitled to recover. This order has been made by the court of its own initiative without a hearing pursuant to CPR Rule 3.3(4)) of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998...''  7.7 In the persuasive case of G4QZ465V - Excel Parking Services Ltd v Wilkinson – Bradford County Court -2 July 2020 (Exhibit 4) the judge had decided that Excel had won. However, due to Excel adding on the £60 the Judge dismissed the case.  7.8        The addition of costs not previously specified on signage are also in breach of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, Schedule 2, specifically paras 6, 10 and 14.   7.9        It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant in this case has knowingly submitted inflated costs and thus the entire claim should be similarly struck out in accordance with Civil Procedure Rule 3.3(4).   In Conclusion   8.1        I invite the court to dismiss the claim.  Statement of Truth  I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.   
    • Well the difference is that in all our other cases It was Kev who was trying to entrap the motorist so sticking two fingers up to him and daring him to try court was from a position of strength. In your case, sorry, you made a mistake so you're not in the position of strength.  I've looked on Google Maps and the signs are few & far between as per Kev's MO, but there is an entrance sign saying "Pay & Display" (and you've admitted in writing that you knew you had to pay) and the signs by the payment machines do say "Sea View Car Park" (and you've admitted in writing you paid the wrong car park ... and maybe outed yourself as the driver). Something I missed in my previous post is that the LoC is only for one ticket, not two. Sorry, but it's impossible to definitively advise what to so. Personally I'd probably gamble on Kev being a serial bottler of court and reply with a snotty letter ridiculing the signage (given you mentioned the signage in your appeal) - but it is a gamble.  
    • No! What has happened is that your pix were up-to-date: 5 hours' maximum stay and £100 PCN. The lazy solicitors have sent ancient pictures: 4 hours' maximum stay and £60 PCN. Don't let on!  Let them be hoisted by their own lazy petard in the court hearing (if they don't bottle before).
    • Thanks for all the suggestions so far I will amend original WS and send again for review.  While looking at my post at very beginning when I submitted photos of signs around the car park I noticed that it says 5 hours maximum stay while the signage sent by solicitor shows 4 hours maximum stay but mine is related to electric bay abuse not sure if this can be of any use in WS.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Natwest v's us (angry and fighting back!!)


Soo43
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5923 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

i wonder if anyone can help me please on 31st january i sent the following letter to natwest:

 

Natwest Credit Card Operations

PO Box 5636

Southend-on-sea

SS99 1WJ

 

Thursday, 31 January 2008

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Claimant: xxxxxx

Defendant: Natwest Credit Card

Reference Number: xxxxxxxx

Thank you for you letter of the 9 January 2008 and the copy of your Terms and Conditions.

 

However I must point out that the enclosed are a current copy of the Terms and Conditions, and the copies required are from the opening of the account(s)and all subsequent updates until the present day.

 

For the avoidance of doubt I now request you seek to provide me with:

1. A legible copy of the original contract that I signed with yourselves

2. A copy of my original terms and conditions and copies of all subsequent terms and conditions and amendments to these terms and conditions until they reflect your current terms and conditions

3. A detailed report of which clause, in the terms and conditions, each charge has been applied against

4. If the enclosed are a true and valid copy of the Terms and Conditions at the time of opening the account, I require a true and certified letter indicating that this is indeed the case

5. I also require the above to be replied to within 14 Days

 

Yours Faithfully

 

xxxxxxxx

 

Received today this letter from natwest....can anyone please advise:

 

thank you for your letter dated 31 january concerning your various requests for validation of the account

 

i am very sorry that our previous response was insufficient and respectfully remind you that there is no requirement under s78 to provide a copy of the original signed application form. we are, however, obliged to provide the customer with a true copy of the agreement relevant to the card product at the date the card agreement was made and this was issued to you when the account was opened in 1999.

 

You have outlined your complaint in the clearest possible terms and i appreciate the strength of your feelings, however, this is a credit card facility whereby you have borrowed money by using the card to pay for goods and swervices. Statements have been issued on a monthly basis since 19999 detailing all purchases and i am disappointed that you have now chosen to refute liability for this debt.

 

Please find enclosed a copy of your most recent statement. I am satisfied that what you lawfully owe us has been set out in detail and i do not consider it necessary to meet the unreasonable request(s) you have now made. If you cease making repayment we will take debt recovery action against you which will include the procedures prescribed under the consumer credit act. If you dispute our legal right to have the money you borrows from us repaid, you are free to bring the matter to the attention of the courts.

 

i will leave the file open until 8 april to ensure you have sufficient time to consider my comments. If you are happy with my letter, you do not need to do anything else and on this date i will close the file.

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

what you have done is ask the right question, however they know the rules surrounding this request better than you. try the following letter and process as it outlines correctly the legal request and makes them (lets say) a little more aware of their legal obligations

 

Firstly, insist that all communications are in writing, lies can be told and later denied during telephone calls, they cant in writing.

 

Paying a debt does not necessarily mean it is legal or legitimate, they need to prove both points to be true

 

This is achieved by requesting a copy of the Signed, Executed Credit Agreement via a Consumer Credit Act (CCA) request.

There is a template letter to be found here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.c o....templates.html

Letter N.

Is it very important to start the letter with the line:

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY in Big Bold letters underlined.

 

always send this request recorded (registered if you can afford it). send a £1 postal order with the request and do not sign anything.

 

keep copies of all correspondence and proof of posting. if you can prove that you sent the request and that they signed for it, it ceases to be your problem

 

After 12 WORKING days the "debt" is in default and stays that way until the request is complied with.

If a FURTHER month passes then the DCA has committed a summary criminal offence and the matter should be referred to Trading Standards for action once the DCA continues to demand payment.

 

follow this path and you should spark their interest a little further

 

hope this helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi and thanks for advise

 

we have already sent letter N back on 12th December and had no response from them ...... the cheque has not be cashed either.....i have proof of postage but not recorded......should i sent it again???

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps i should elobrate a little more

 

i will scan documents - 5 mins

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I have reread your post and realised I have misunderstood your current position within the whole process

 

I now realise that you have submitted a CCA request, had something back from them and then the letters shown below constitute the correspondence following their reply.

 

i wonder if anyone can help me please on 31st january i sent the following letter to NatWest:

 

thank you for your letter dated 31 january concerning your various requests for validation of the account

 

 

i am very sorry that our previous response was insufficient and respectfully remind you that there is no requirement under s78 to provide a copy of the original signed application form. we are, however, obliged to provide the customer with a true copy of the agreement relevant to the card product at the date the card agreement was made and this was issued to you when the account was opened in 1999.

 

You have outlined your complaint in the clearest possible terms and i appreciate the strength of your feelings, however, this is a credit card facility whereby you have borrowed money by using the card to pay for goods and swervices. Statements have been issued on a monthly basis since 19999 detailing all purchases and i am disappointed that you have now chosen to refute liability for this debt.

 

Please find enclosed a copy of your most recent statement. I am satisfied that what you lawfully owe us has been set out in detail and i do not consider it necessary to meet the unreasonable request(s) you have now made. If you cease making repayment we will take debt recovery action against you which will include the procedures prescribed under the consumer credit act. If you dispute our legal right to have the money you borrows from us repaid, you are free to bring the matter to the attention of the courts. it is a legal request, they are obliged to respond. If they find the law unreasonable then perhaps they should write to their MP, they can't have it both ways, "we want to use this law, but you aren't allowed to"

 

i will leave the file open until 8 april to ensure you have sufficient time to consider my comments. If you are happy with my letter, you do not need to do anything else and on this date i will close the file. They can leave it as long as they want, the law stipulates the timescales, not them

 

I think the whole thing depends on what they have sent you, are you certain that the CCA is not enforceable?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

thank you for your letter dated 31 january concerning your various requests for validation of the account

 

i am very sorry that our previous response was insufficient and respectfully remind you that there is no requirement under s78 to provide a copy of the original signed application form. we are, however, obliged to provide the customer with a true copy of the agreement relevant to the card product at the date the card agreement was made and this was issued to you when the account was opened in 1999. This is a good combat indicator that they do not have the original agreement.

 

You have outlined your complaint in the clearest possible terms and i appreciate the strength of your feelings, however, this is a credit card facility whereby you have borrowed money by using the card to pay for goods and swervices. Statements have been issued on a monthly basis since 19999 detailing all purchases and i am disappointed that you have now chosen to refute liability for this debt. Standard template reply used by NatWest and RBS. It translates as: we don't have an agreement, and although we think we can behave just as we like, we are now attempting to make you think it's morally correct to pay us anyway.

 

Please find enclosed a copy of your most recent statement. I am satisfied that what you lawfully owe us has been set out in detail and i do not consider it necessary to meet the unreasonable request(s) you have now made. If you cease making repayment we will take debt recovery action against you which will include the procedures prescribed under the consumer credit act. If you dispute our legal right to have the money you borrows from us repaid, you are free to bring the matter to the attention of the courts. More template stuff. Given that they will need to produce the original signed and executed agreement if they want to enforce it, why do they think that you asking for a copy is unreasonable? The last sentence is pure bluff.

 

i will leave the file open until 8 april to ensure you have sufficient time to consider my comments. If you are happy with my letter, you do not need to do anything else and on this date i will close the file.

 

I'd suggest a short reply, asking them to put up or shut up.

 

 

Thank you for your letter dated xxxxx. I am sorry you think it is unreasonable for me to ask you to properly comply with my request pursuant to s.78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 by producing copies of the documents referred to in the agreement. Your wilful ignorance of the law, and failure to make any meaningful effort to resolve the dispute between us is dissapointing.

 

I would be grateful if you would kindly confirm whether or not you are in possession of a signed and executed agreement in respect of the above account.

 

Yours etc.

 

 

I've had similar nonsense from both HSBC and RBS. HSBC admitted they had no agreement, and that the debt was unenforceable - they tried a couple of DCAs, both of whom backed off when they were told it was unenforceable; RBS sent one 'we intend to pursue this' letter, but their silence has been conspicuous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok i think i can expand a little on 18th december we sent this letter

 

 

«Company name»

«address 1»

«address 2»

«town»

«county»

«post code»

 

Tuesday, 18 December 2007

Dear sir or madam

Re:- Account/Reference Number «account no»

 

With reference to the above agreement, we would be grateful if you would send us a copy of this credit agreement.

 

We understand that under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Sections 77-79), we are entitled to receive a copy of our credit agreement on request. We enclose a payment of £1.00 which represents the fee payable under the Consumer Credit Act.

 

We understand a copy of our credit agreement should be supplied within 12 working days.

 

We understand that under the Consumer Credit Act creditors are unable to enforce an agreement if they fail to comply with a request for a copy of the agreement under these sections of the Act.

 

We look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours faithfully

 

signature

Enc - cheque £1.00

 

we heard nothing for ages then we received these documents

Credit card agreement - and copy of application form

i am just trying to upload the documents but basically we got a copy of the application form - and they sent credit card agreement with my card number on it and credit limit on it - BUT they had my current address on it and we only moved here in nov 2006 not 1999 when the agreement they refer to was alleged to have been taken out.

i then wrote the first letter i placed on this forum

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

trying to upload documents but unsuccessful can i email them to you to look at??

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

All of which points to them not having an enforceable agreement.

 

If they do, why don't they send you a copy instead of going to the trouble of cobbling together a looky-likey? Notice how careful their wording is - it mentions debt collection procedures (well, they can ask...), and it mentions that you can query their legalrights in court - but it doesn't say they'll be starting litigation - because they know they can't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

send the following

 

quote

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

Thank you for your letter dated **********, the contents of which are noted

I note that to date you have not complied with my request for a copy of the credit agreement for this alleged debt which you are pursuing me for

 

The Consumer Credit Act 1974 demands that I be supplied with a true copy of any properly executed credit agreement that exists in relation to the above account. I may ask for this on demand providing that a fee of £1.00 is paid. This fee was sent with my original letter.

 

My request remains outstanding. All you have sent is a pre-contractual application form, which does not contain the prescribed terms contained within Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553). Without production of the said agreement I am unable to asses if I am indeed liable for any alleged debt to you, nor does it give me any chance to evaluate whether any original agreement was ‘properly executed’.

 

I still require you to send me a true copy of the original credit agreement that you allege exists. As you will know, under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a judge is not permitted to make any enforcement order unless the creditor can provide a true signed copy of the original credit agreement. This means that unless you can produce such an agreement, this alleged debt is not enforceable in law.

 

 

For the avoidance of any doubt I have included section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, which states…

 

78 Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement

(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of [£1], shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

(a) the state of the account, and

(b) the amount, if any, currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and

© the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.

(2) …….

(3)….….

(4) ………

(4A)……

(5) ………

(6) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement; and

(b) if the default continues for one month he commits an offence.

(7) This section does not apply to a non-commercial agreement, and subsections [(4) to (5)] do not apply to a small agreement.

 

 

Clearly the agreement which was supplied in no way complies with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and I now draw your attention to section 78 subsection 6 which states If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;

 

Clearly this is a situation as described in s78(6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the debt is unenforceable at this time. In addition, I draw your attention to section 127 (3) Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states

 

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

 

This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

 

To clarify s61(1) states

 

(1)A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless—

 

(a) a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to regulations under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed manner both by the debtor or hirer and by or on behalf of the creditor or owner, and

 

(b) the document embodies all the terms of the agreement, other than implied terms, and

 

© The document is, when presented or sent to the debtor or hirer for signature, in such a state that all its terms are readily legible

 

In addition the prescribed terms referred to in section 60 CCA1974 are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following—

 

1.Number of repayments;

2.Amount of repayments;

3.Frequency and timing of repayments;

4.Dates of repayments;

5.The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable

 

 

Therefore based upon the Consumer Credit Act 1974 this debt as it stands is unenforceable and should this proceed to litigation, a court is precluded from making an enforcement order under section 127(3) unless a true copy of the signed agreement is produced. I will re-iterate that this is clearly not a true copy of the executed agreement between ********* and myself.

 

At the point where this account entered into the default situation as described in s78 (6) CCA 1974 no other charges are allowed to be added until such time as ********* become compliant with my request. As ****** are still not in compliance with my request I insist that the following takes place with immediate effect

  • All charges levied since ******** 2007 be removed from the account and further charges cease until such time as ******8 comply fully with my original request or such time as a court makes an enforcement order
  • All entries which refer to missed payments be removed from my credit file
  • All collection activities by your company cease with immediate effect until ******** comply with my request from ********* 2007 or such time as a court makes an enforcement order

In addition, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

 

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

Clearly your pursuance of this debt falls into this category; in addition I must draw your attention to the fact that this debt is under investigation by Mr ******** of ********************** Trading Standards as I have made a complaint as a direct result of **************** failure to comply with the CCA 74 .

 

What I Require.

 

I require that you send me a true copy of the executed agreement and all documents referred to in it as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. If you are unable to supply the requested documentation because no such agreement is in existence I require written clarification as such.

 

I require that you comply with my request within 7 days of the date of this letter. I will not correspond any further with you until I either receive a copy of the requested documents as laid down in section 78(1) CCA 74 or clarification that such agreement doesn’t exist.

 

No other correspondence will be accepted

 

I trust this out lines the situation

 

Regards

 

 

 

unquote

 

 

At the end of the day you have made a legal request, you have proof that you sent it and that they received it, they are in default of that request.

 

the document with your current address on has been produced in an attempt to deceive you and should be reported to Trading Standards, how can a supposed agreement from 6yrs+ ago contain your current address if you have moved during that time? even if it were enforceable in all other ways, this simple fact makes them completely irrelevant

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you spamhead - i will prepare the letter now

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

All of which points to them not having an enforceable agreement. Fully agree, yeah, but no, but yeah, but no..... it has that ring of someone who is outraged at having their integrity questioned and it's normally a reaction based on fear of discovery

 

If they do, why don't they send you a copy instead of going to the trouble of cobbling together a looky-likey? Notice how careful their wording is - it mentions debt collection procedures (well, they can ask...), and it mentions that you can query their legalrights in court - but it doesn't say they'll be starting litigation - because they know they can't.

 

at the end of the day you're still waiting for your request to be fulfilled and the clock is still ticking, and you have it in writing that they think your legal request is unreasonable and that they can create false imstruments at will.

 

 

I'm sure there's a law against that last one LOL :o

Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont not think they realise that they have put my new address on the credit card agreement !!!! should i tell them????

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

tell them nothing, if they claim that what they have sent you is a true copy of the agreement that you signed, they will be acknowledging that they are effectively attempting to deceive you with a forgery. it's all about building evidence

 

we don't want to put them off, keep on giving them the rope and lets see if they do a good job

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

this is the information we have had from NatWest so far

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

currenttermsconditions090108.jpg

ccatermspage2.jpg

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Soo, if you open the files on your computer with MS Paint and use the 'thick brush' you can paint over your details, save the files and post them back here again. I've posted details here accidentally before - just better to be safe than sorry ;)

We will not be intimidated.

'The pen is mightier than the sword'.

Petition to Outlaw Debt Sale and Purchase

- can't read/post much as eye strain's v.bad.

VIVA CAG!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

thought i had changed them..... were are they showing now please

Northern Rock - loan - £6000

Beneficial credit card - £12+

GM Card - £13+

will have to look up the others have about 21 debtors totalling about £175,000

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...