Egg credit card agreement terminated

[BEC01]

Hi,

 

I'm sorry to have to disagree with other contributors to this thread who seem to think that Egg are just about keeping within the provisions of CCA 1974.

In my opinion, Egg are doing this in a mistaken belief that it falls within CCA, in contrast to the mass termination letter, which even they now realise falls outside CCA.

The letter sent by Egg to your o/h is just as invalid as the mass termination letter of last year, - for the following reason;

 

Egg have indicated to you that any regular payments out of your Egg Card account such as monthly subscriptions to a third party will not be paid. EGG CANNOT DO THAT!!!!!!!

As you have not breached the terms of the agreement (i.e. you are not in arrears), the most that Egg can do is restrict or defer your right to draw on credit.

I know this sounds confusing, but to take two examples,

 

1. Egg is acting totally within it's rights to not provide you with further credit - by, for example refusing to provide you with a new credit card.

 

2. Any previously arranged/agreed monthly payments out of your Egg account fall within the term "restricted use" credit. Therefore such previously agreed payments must be honoured by Egg - They canno just leave you in the lurch by stopping the payments out of your Egg account.

This is covered by, for example, S11(b) of CCA 1974. Additionally, a court would regard it as an unfair business relationship within the terms of S140 of CCA1974.

 

Hope that makes sense.

 

Regards

Peter

 

Perfect sense Peter. I bow to your knowledge.

The restricted use term is very interesting.

 

I do agree with others that Egg appear to be on the edge...

[basa48]

I do agree with others that Egg appear to be on the edge...

 

My worry is if Egg go over the cliff any new 'owner' may be cleverer and more determined. :-|

[lollipop73]

Well, who knows ? They have not specified amounts, only that it is 'substancial' I have to ring them for more details

 

 

What a hoot!?

[militantconsumer]

In my working life, A DCA once offered me a 50% deal in full and final settlement for a "debt" they were chasing.

 

I immediately became suspicious and, when I delved further into the details, found out that the company that the money was being claimed from hadn't yet been formed at the time the "debt" was incurred. The company who really owed the money had since been liquidated, so they had tried to switch the debt to a different company with a similar name.

 

No wonder were so keen to settle for 50%!

 

It will be interesting to see how low Egg will go. For some people, paying a fraction of the amount they thought they owed until recently would seem like a fair compromise, especially if such a deal were accompanied by a default removal - or at least default avoidance.

[toymaker1]

My worry is if Egg go over the cliff any new 'owner' may be cleverer and more determined. :-|

 

 

It doesn't matter how clever or determined they are, they still are required to strictly comply with CCA 1974 - the same as you and me have to.

That is what they didn't do when they "terminated" 161,000 accounts.

 

Regards

[cosalt]

My worry is if Egg go over the cliff any new 'owner' may be cleverer and more determined. :-|

 

Unless they can change the definition of 'termination' or transpose the word 'credit' on to eggs 'agreements', what can they do?

[basa48]

Unless they can change the definition of 'termination' or transpose the word 'credit' on to eggs 'agreements', what can they do?

 

Fancy footwork, dancing around the issues until the debtor gets fed up or dies of old age !!

 

So far I'm not aware if anyone has won a case using 'approved' and the 'termination' issue is a very hot potato which has not been tested to a conclusion ... yet.

[thekat1979]

I got an answer from Egg about where in the Consumer Credit Act does it state they can end a non-defaulted agreement, and that I did not want THEIR agreement info, but specifically the CCA as they cannot give me less favourable terms than those given in law...I got this...

 

Dear thekat1979

 

I can see from your previous messages that this hasn't been addressed, under section 20.2 of your Egg Card agreement we can end your Egg Card agreement after 35 days notice.

 

As you've asked for where it states this within the Consumer Credit Act I've escalated your complaint to our Customer Relations Office, they'll respond to your complaint shortly. The reference for your records is:

 

EGG/reference number

 

Please get back to me if you require any further assistance.

 

Thanks for your message.

 

Regards

[c14r3]

I have received a letter from the DCA today saying they can now offer me a substantial discount off the balance for a full and final settlement........

 

 

 

 

 

Strangely enough I won't be taking up that offer !

 

I have just received a offer from a DCA too although they wrote to me last month saying they had closed the account on their system. Anyway I am not going to be accepting any offers.

[thekat1979]

What is funny is that the reply they gave me wasn't to the one asking about the termination letter, I sent a few messages on the one day, putting different subjects in each one just to keep things clear, and the answer they gave about the termination of my account is in response to one I asked about the dataT protection request I had in. Silly people.

 

This is after they have spent the past three months telling me they can't communicate with me via secure message due to the way my account has been handled.

[lollipop73]

I would be extremely tempted to send them something saying you can't communicate over the phone because of the way they have handled your account-but that's me just peeved because they have DN'd me today-the b£%$*&*ds.

[militantconsumer]

For those who have been defaulted and are now being offered settlement figures.... I would make sure you demand removal of default as part of any settlement agreement.

[cosalt]

I won't be paying them a penny, why would they offer a discount if they could enforce my agreement? They would just take me to court for the full amount surely?

[BEC01]

What is funny is that the reply they gave me wasn't to the one asking about the termination letter, I sent a few messages on the one day, putting different subjects in each one just to keep things clear, and the answer they gave about the termination of my account is in response to one I asked about the dataT protection request I had in. Silly people.

 

This is after they have spent the past three months telling me they can't communicate with me via secure message due to the way my account has been handled.

 

The reason that they have changed their tune with you is that they read this forum. They are taking notice.

 

I know it goes against the forum spirit, but if you at all can, get a Solicitor to look at the termination letter. You should get a no fee look appraisal in any case.

 

You just need to formally go for them on this one.

They can't defend it.

[basa48]

I've not had response to my 'dispute' letter yet. They received it a fortnight ago.

 

Oh .. correction, they've reminded me my DD is cancelled! Erm .. I know, I cancelled it!

 

PS: I'm anticipating being defaulted and my credit file borked. I intend to take this all the way to court if needs be.

[BEC01]

I've not had response to my 'dispute' letter yet. They received it a fortnight ago.

 

Oh .. correction, they've reminded me my DD is cancelled! Erm .. I know, I cancelled it!

 

PS: I'm anticipating being defaulted and my credit file borked. I intend to take this all the way to court if needs be.

 

I think so much credit has been extended to individuals, who are now struggling through no fault of their own, who must be thinking: 6 years of a default notice, or 10 years repaying the debt.

 

Doesn't add up.

 

Not that this is ever intended as advice, of course.

[basa48]

I think so much credit has been extended to individuals, who are now struggling through no fault of their own, who must be thinking: 6 years of a default notice, or 10 years repaying the debt.

 

Doesn't add up.

 

Not that this is ever intended as advice, of course.

 

I don't intend to do either!

 

I have a plan!!!

[egg_nog]

This is yet another bit of proof that they messed up with the original termination letter. And boy-oh-boy do they know it.

 

What they have done to your o/h is perfectly within their rights, and they have done it correctly this time (assuming your transcription is accurate).

 

Although, it also is clearly not written by a legal expert.

 

It does also reinforce the widely spread rumour within banking circles that yet more jobs will be gone in the UK due to greed.

 

 

Hi BigEddieChek

 

Many thanks for your reply, I wasn't sure if Egg had done it correctly so thanks for putting me straight on that.

I copied the letter exactly so you could see what their latest letters are like

I just think it very bad business to treat customers like that.

I worked in the financial industry for 10 years and would hate to be on the receiving end in a call centre of a company who clearly don't give a stuff about their customers!

The thing that annoys me most is he has a balance and pays interest every month so they ARE making money out of him.

Wish we had the cash to pay it off but like everyone else just now that just wouldn't be possible........however when things improve it will be the first thing we will pay extra too to get rid.

Glad I found this forum it may be useful in the future.

 

Thanks again and I hope those who are disputing Egg are successful

[egg_nog]

Hi,

 

I'm sorry to have to disagree with other contributors to this thread who seem to think that Egg are just about keeping within the provisions of CCA 1974.

In my opinion, Egg are doing this in a mistaken belief that it falls within CCA, in contrast to the mass termination letter, which even they now realise falls outside CCA.

The letter sent by Egg to your o/h is just as invalid as the mass termination letter of last year, - for the following reason;

 

Egg have indicated to you that any regular payments out of your Egg Card account such as monthly subscriptions to a third party will not be paid. EGG CANNOT DO THAT!!!!!!!

As you have not breached the terms of the agreement (i.e. you are not in arrears), the most that Egg can do is restrict or defer your right to draw on credit.

I know this sounds confusing, but to take two examples,

 

1. Egg is acting totally within it's rights to not provide you with further credit - by, for example refusing to provide you with a new credit card.

 

2. Any previously arranged/agreed monthly payments out of your Egg account fall within the term "restricted use" credit. Therefore such previously agreed payments must be honoured by Egg - They canno just leave you in the lurch by stopping the payments out of your Egg account.

This is covered by, for example, S11(b) of CCA 1974. Additionally, a court would regard it as an unfair business relationship within the terms of S140 of CCA1974.

 

Hope that makes sense.

 

Regards

Peter

 

Hi Peter

 

Thanks for your reply.

Luckily we don't have any payments coming out of his Egg acc so that part of the letter doesn't apply to us - thank god!

[toymaker1]

Hi

My O/H .... is not in default.....He recently asked for an increase in his credit limit and was refused!!

He is now gobsmacked at recieving this letter.

Following a review we have decided not to issue a replacement when your current card expires and to end your credit card facility.[/size]

this means after the expiry date you will not be able to use your account and

The Card Agreement continued to apply until the balance is repaid in full.[/size]

 

My O/H did call Egg initially asking why they have done this

 

Hi Egg nog

 

If you are content to accept Egg's decision, thats fine, and best of luck.

However, when you study the Egg letter closely, the fact remains that Egg are acting outside the provisions of CCA197.

Everyone must react as they see fit, but, speaking for myself, I have stood up to them very very firmaly, because I know they have acted outside the provisions of CCA.

For example,

1.Egg are within their rights to refuse your o/h a credit increase.

2.Egg are within their rights to refuse to issue a replacement card when your o/h's current card expires.

3. Egg are NOT acting within their rights when they state to your o/h that Egg has decided to end his credit card facility.

- if it was my I would (and have done) ask Egg to indicate to me which part of CCA1974 provides Egg with entitlement to end my credit card facility.

 

What Egg COULD have done (but didn't!) was to say to your o/h that Egg was restricting the credit facility to zero- the point being that the position was open to being reviewed/altered at a future date (remember that the account still continues to exist).

 

By stating that they are ending the credit card facility, it is just another way of saying they are terminating it (which is NOT cancelling it!)

They cannot "end" or "terminate" the facility, they can only restrict or defer it's credit facility.

 

I am not suggesting you fight them on this, just pointing out some things which are worth thinking about.

By the way, you will find Egg has no answer to the question I have suggested you ask them (Which part of CCA1974...etc etc) BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ONE!

 

Regards

Peter

[lollipop73]

So Toymaker,

 

Let me just get this clear. I wasn't one of those in the mass cull of cards that Egg did 18mths ago, I got a letter refusing to issue me with another card December 08. I wasn't in arrears-I paid more than the minimum payment-and was "servicing" the credit ie-using it and paying it off. They were in the wrong to do this?

 

 

Very interesting. MBNA did the same last summer-very interesting ( I have been waiting for a good reason to go for MBNA).

[thekat1979]

I just got a secure message from Egg.

 

I wrote to them telling them that the account was in serious dispute due to the amount outstanding being made up - around 25% of the debt I believe - in charges, and that is without figuring out how much interest I have paid at 26.9% I told them that I have asked them to stop processing my data to CRA's as it is innaccurate, and whilst I gave them permission to share info about me, I didn't give them permission to share innaccurate info about me. I've been getting nothing butt 'you can only be communicated with via phone on these issues' e-mails.

Today's one however said:

 

Dear thekat1979

 

Whilst your account is in dispute you MUST continue to maintain payments on your account'. They said they have started yet another complaint for me - GRRRRRR! That's like the fifth one and I've hard NOTHING from any of them!

 

Are they right that I need to keep up payments on a disputed debt? I cannot afford to, and haven't been able to since they lumped charges onto my account which put me over limit and I was NEVER going to be able to pay off the balance anyway lol because I can't afford more than the minimum and this often wasn't even covering the interest so even though they cancelled my card over a year ago, my balance is actually bigger now than it was then!

[thekat1979]

BTW the amount they want from me to stop collections is just over £200 - then apparently they will allow me to continue JUST paying the minimum which doesn't cover interest most months. How the heck I'm supposed to clear this debt off I don't know. Funny how I went from 15.9% to 26.9% just one month before they sent out the letter in Jan 08.

[toymaker1]

So Toymaker,

 

Let me just get this clear. I wasn't one of those in the mass cull of cards that Egg did 18mths ago, I got a letter refusing to issue me with another card December 08. I wasn't in arrears-I paid more than the minimum payment-and was "servicing" the credit ie-using it and paying it off. They were in the wrong to do this?

 

 

Very interesting. MBNA did the same last summer-very interesting ( I have been waiting for a good reason to go for MBNA).

 

What Egg (or any other credit card provider) CANNOT do, (if you are not in default of the agreement) is to say to you that they (i.e. Egg) are ending your credit card facility. There is just no legal right for them to do that.

For example, I have a barclaycard which is not in arrears or default in any way. On my monthly statements Barclaycard have, for the past year, inserted a notice stating " your current limit is £0.00"

Barclaycard are acting totally within their legal rights to say that to me.

You will notice that it makes clear that I DO have a credit limit, but it has been restricted for the time being to £0.00. It is open to Barclaycard to increase it from £0.00 at some future date.

That is covered fully by CCA1974, but is a completely different situation to a credit card provider saying that they have ENDED your credit facility.

I hope I am not making this sound too obscure.

Everyone must react according to their own situation.

Personally, I stop paying a penny in repayments when a company breaches the agreement, until it is sorted out.

I have done that with Egg - I stopped d/d of £300 since April 2008, once I realised they were acting outside the provisions of CCA1974.

I put everything clearly in special delivery letters. They just dont have an answer to the following question

"I would be grateful if Egg would indicate to me the relevant section of the Consumer Credit which provides Egg with the legal entitlement to terminate my Egg agreement (or credit facility)"

The reason they dont have an answer is that THERE ISN'T ONE.

 

By the way, anyone who knows an answer, please let me know, because I am still looking!

 

Regards

[toymaker1]

I just got a secure message from Egg.

 

I wrote to them telling them that the account was in serious dispute due to the amount outstanding being made up - around 25% of the debt I believe - in charges, and that is without figuring out how much interest I have paid at 26.9% I told them that I have asked them to stop processing my data to CRA's as it is innaccurate, and whilst I gave them permission to share info about me, I didn't give them permission to share innaccurate info about me. I've been getting nothing butt 'you can only be communicated with via phone on these issues' e-mails.

Today's one however said:

 

Dear thekat1979

 

Whilst your account is in dispute you MUST continue to maintain payments on your account'. They said they have started yet another complaint for me - GRRRRRR! That's like the fifth one and I've hard NOTHING from any of them!

 

Are they right that I need to keep up payments on a disputed debt? I cannot afford to, and haven't been able to since they lumped charges onto my account which put me over limit and I was NEVER going to be able to pay off the balance anyway lol because I can't afford more than the minimum and this often wasn't even covering the interest so even though they cancelled my card over a year ago, my balance is actually bigger now than it was then!

 

You really MUST stop communicating with Egg via "secure message" system. You have only yourself to blame if, as a result, it just gets more complicated with messages to and fro, from different people each time etc etc.

You must only communicate by letters, special or recorded delivery.

You must act according to your own situation, but speaking personally, I do not pay a penny until a dispute is resolved. I set everything out in writing, and make it clear that interest charges arising since the start of the dispute are caused by their delay in resolving the dispute, and they should not be continuing collection activities anyway, whilst the dispute is continuing. Also, if you make a repayment offer, request that interest be suspended, so as not to cause your overindebtedness to Egg to be increased. Dont pay anything until agreement is reached. I am just telling you what I do. - It might not be right for your situation. The main thing is LETTERS ONLY.

 

Regard

Peter