Egg credit card agreement terminated

[BEC01]

One also has to ponder the stability of the aforementioned company within the current economic climate in the US...

[CONFUSED45]

Got letter from DLC today,stating that they have been advised by egg that there is no valid dispute on the account.

 

Shall I ignore it or send another account dispute letter, i have only received a letter from egg acknowledging my letter and they were investigating my query:!:

confused

[Bosund]

Hi Confused45,

 

Sent a SAR to Egg, but not a dispute letter, and they sent copies of all my correspondence to them. Also to Citi and they were kind enough to include a copy of my dispute letter.

 

May be cluthing at straws but if you did receive a copy of all correspondence may be there is a copy your dispute letter in there.

 

If so send DLC a copy...

 

Regards,

 

Bosun.

[basa48]

Got letter from DLC today,stating that they have been advised by egg that there is no valid dispute on the account.

 

Shall I ignore it or send another account dispute letter, i have only received a letter from egg acknowledging my letter and they were investigating my query:!:

confused

 

No creditor will ever admit the account is in dispute, they never do. They will pretend to be being helpful by 'investigating your complaint' but that means nothing much legally. But then neither does the account being in 'dispute' (except perhaps to the ICO, but they are a waste of taxpayers money anyway ).

[phatram]

This just arrived,

[Marcus_ad]

It all depends on how much you owe, if you owe anything. You must ignore Moorcroft at all costs. Let them send their threatening little letters. If they do take you to court, then you will receive a summons and you can then have plenty of time to fight them. you will also have the protection of the court. Otherwise, just ignore them. Give them absolutely nothing to go on - they only go after the easy meat - ie people that try and do the right thing and negotiate, admit it and are easily contactable.

[militantconsumer]

Others feel that you should respond to letters threatening legal action and set out the reasons why you dispute the alleged debt. People have got rid of Moorcroft by challenging them in this way. Surely it's better if it goes back to the original creditor?

[Marcus_ad]

nope, not in my experience. In my experience - once you put your head above the trenches you get your head shot off. maybe go back to the original lender, but once the horrible t8888ers at moorcroft have it they dont ever let go if they think they have you. keep as silent and as impossible to identify and/or contact as possible, they might not give up but you will move down their list. also if you contact the original lender, they will say lots of sweet things to you - and then within a day or two moorcroft will be banging on your door.

 

There is a caveat though - if the debt - if it is a debt - is for a lot of money then unfortunately you will stay at the top of the list because its worth their while making a big effort to get you. However, if it is a lot it is unlikely the original lender will fail to negotiate directly.

 

It a game. In my eyes ALL credit card companies lose all rights to recover debts the second they start charging 20, 30, 40% interest on people they KNOW DAMN WELL cannot afford it. They make the situation 10 times worse and then tell the poor borrower it was THEIR fault. The courts in those situations should tell them to bugger off, not get any money and reassess their disgusting tactics.

 

Credit Reference agencies should also not be allowed to accept defaults unless proven in court. I'm sick of being threatened about my "credit file" every 5 minutes like they can ruin my life with out any proof or protection from the law. If they truly thought someone owed them money - then they should have to go through the full legal process like the rest of us have to.

 

Yeah right.

Edited November 10, 2009 by Marcus_ad
additional info

[militantconsumer]

It depends on the circumstances, but it IS possible:

 

[Marcus_ad]

yeah so what??? thats as rare as rocking horse s**t an you know it. stop encouraging people to do things that are almost impossible. These companies are incredibly rapacious and like the terminator they will never, ever give in unless your case is absolutely watertight.

 

Even if it is watertight, make it difficult for them, don't make it easy. Make them waste their time and resources chasing you to a fruitless, penniless end.

 

They are the **** of society, feeding off the weak. Well done, as soon as they finished with you they were able to jump all over some poor old lady, or some poor depressed person unable to organise themselves, or some poor family trying to duck and dive and simply make ends meet.

 

Proud now with your letter of victory?

 

Sorry but I'm seeing society become one where the weak get completely trodden on. There used to be protections against harassment that could be used in the first instance, not as a last resort in the most dire cases by the lucky few that get the right advice. Unless a debt can be proven in the courts they should not be able to even write to you.

 

If they chase you like a demented bloodhound, and it transpires they have no evidence like in your case, they should be fined very large amounts of money until they learn to behave themselves.

Edited November 10, 2009 by Marcus_ad

[toymaker1]

This just arrived,

 

To clarify your situation,

is it the case that you wrote to Midas Legal Services or Moorcroft last August asking them to indicate to you which part of CCA 1974 provided Egg with legal authority to terminate your Egg agreement in 2008 ?

And is it the case that you did not receive a response to your written request for that info?

and is it the case that this letter from Moorcroft is all you have received since you wrote asking in August for the info referred to?

 

It would be useful if you could post that info, or any other relevant info, so that you can receive advice.

 

Regards

[diddydicky]

This just arrived,

 

although probably an empty threat, the advice to completely ignore the letter is not good advice,

 

it is always preferable to be seen to have responded promptly to any "new " issue or threat and i would advise a response

 

it can be as simple as:-

 

dear Sirs

 

thank you for your letter of XXXXXXX and note your intention to commence legal proceedings. I look forward to your further advices

 

Yours F

 

with of course a coopy on file

 

send proof of posting and attached the slip to the file

[phatram]

To clarify your situation,

is it the case that you wrote to Midas Legal Services or Moorcroft last August asking them to indicate to you which part of CCA 1974 provided Egg with legal authority to terminate your Egg agreement in 2008 ?

And is it the case that you did not receive a response to your written request for that info?

and is it the case that this letter from Moorcroft is all you have received since you wrote asking in August for the info referred to?

 

It would be useful if you could post that info, or any other relevant info, so that you can receive advice.

 

Regards

Thats all correct, not heard a word from them until this.

[Marcus_ad]

Well there are many instances where I have completely ignored them and they eventually give up. If I have ever had a court summons, 9/10 they havent actually got any evidence and have backed down or lost the case.

 

I might get a letter once every few months but essentially they have given up. HOWEVER, if i made once little squeak in their direction about anything, the whole nightmare will start again.

 

In any event - how dare they hound people without being in the absolute knowledge they have all the evidence required by law? They should be put out out of business by civil disobedience. Ignore them, make them chase you for nothing if you can. They will go bust, and then they will be the ones hounded for their debts..... oh no they wont will they, I forget, that's just a special treat for the poor individual consumer.

[militantconsumer]

yeah so what??? thats as rare as rocking horse s**t an you know it. stop encouraging people to do things that are almost impossible. These companies are incredibly rapacious and like the terminator they will never, ever give in unless your case is absolutely watertight.

 

Even if it is watertight, make it difficult for them, don't make it easy. Make them waste their time and resources chasing you to a fruitless, penniless end.

 

They are the **** of society, feeding off the weak. Well done, as soon as they finished with you they were able to jump all over some poor old lady, or some poor depressed person unable to organise themselves, or some poor family trying to duck and dive and simply make ends meet.

 

Proud now with your letter of victory?

 

Sorry but I'm seeing society become one where the weak get completely trodden on. There used to be protections against harassment that could be used in the first instance, not as a last resort in the most dire cases by the lucky few that get the right advice. Unless a debt can be proven in the courts they should not be able to even write to you.

 

If they chase you like a demented bloodhound, and it transpires they have no evidence like in your case, they should be fined very large amounts of money until they learn to behave themselves.

 

I don't know how common it is for Moorcroft to give up in this way. We have only dealt with them on one account and they sent us the above letter when we challenged them on a legal point about lack of CCA.

 

This shows that it is possible for Moorcrot to send the "debt" back to the original creditor. I think that is useful information to share with people reading this forum.

 

If there is a genuine dispute (as there is here with the "termination" letter, as explained throughout this thread by toymaker1) then a brief letter to that point is advisable. Ignoring a "Letter Before Action" is not a good idea as court action should not be taken lightly.

 

I agree with your general comments about Debt Collection Agencies and their underhand methods.

 

PS - it is probably worth adding that the Moorcroft letter was in relation to a Next Directory account which has now been sold on to Cabot. Out of the frying pan....

[toymaker1]

Thats all correct, not heard a word from them until this.

 

I can only tell you what I would do in your situation. I would send a letter something like this - you should be able to modify it to your exact situation:

 

 

 

Dear xxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter dated xxxxx.

 

I am very concerned that Moorcroft and midaslegalservicesa have chosen not to provide a response to the points raised by me in my letter dated xxxx which was delivered to midaslegalservices by Post Office Special Delivery on xxxxx. I will be in a position to respond to the points raised by you in your letter after Moorcroft provides me with a response to the points raised by me in my letter to midaslegalservices.

 

As you will be aware, in my letter dated xxxxx I requested

midaslegalservices, as Egg's appointed agent, to indicate to me the relevant section of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which provides Egg with legal entitlement to terminate my Egg Agreement with effect from March 6 2008.

 

In the event that the dispute between Egg and myself is put before a court for adjudication, I will draw the court's attention to Moorcroft and midaslegalservices refusal to provide a response to my request for information as outlined above, and as included in my letter to midaslegalsservices dated xxxx. I consider that my request for that information is very clearly understandable and is directly related to Egg's decision to terminate it's contractual agreement with me with effect from March 6 2008.

 

I will also draw the court's attention to Moorcroft's continued debt collection activity despite the continuing and unresolved dispute between Egg and myself regarding my Egg credit card agreement. As you will be aware,this is in breach of the Office Of Fair Trading Guidelines on Debt Collecting.

 

I look forward to your response as a matter of urgency, in order that I can provide a response to the points raised by you in your letter.

 

Yours faithfully

[BEC01]

I can also vouch for that Moorcroft can be shaken off.

 

Avoid telephone contact, but some carefully worded letters can be invaluable.

 

I share many of the sentiments on here though.

 

Does anyone know how many cases actually go to the courts?

It will almost certainly be the minority who do not give in to the bullying of these companies.

 

Egg are going to be severely tested in the courts over the next 6 - 12 months.

I would be very surprised to see them come out of it, to be honest.

 

Just sit tight, and take a slow, measured approach.

 

[basa48]

I'm being bugged by ARC at the moment and will send off a version of Toymakers letter in response.

 

Incidentally Big Eddie, how is your class action of no response going?

[BEC01]

Incidentally Big Eddie, how is your class action of no response going?

 

Letters requesting direct debits to be re-setup ceased, then secure message alerts ceased.

 

After that several phone calls that were answered with a response "Sorry you have the wrong number". They stopped.

 

Several letters from CCA - who are actually Egg. This is, of course required by law, confirmed on the footers of their letters.

 

After that, been quiet for a month. We are confident that they will not take it to court.

 

I'd be interested to hear if anyone HAS actually been taken to court by Egg

[alisindebt]

I can also vouch for that Moorcroft can be shaken off.

 

Avoid telephone contact, but some carefully worded letters can be invaluable.

 

I share many of the sentiments on here though.

 

Does anyone know how many cases actually go to the courts?

It will almost certainly be the minority who do not give in to the bullying of these companies.

 

Egg are going to be severely tested in the courts over the next 6 - 12 months.

I would be very surprised to see them come out of it, to be honest.

 

Just sit tight, and take a slow, measured approach.

 

 

100% agreed! Why? because I asked Egg for a copy of my CCA on my Egg card in March 2009. Guess what, no CCA has been sent to me, despite numerous letters and emails.

 

The reason for this, if you read through the various posts on here, is that old Egg CCAs (mine was around 2002), have lots of mistakes on them. Missing prescribed terms and conditions, incorrect interest rate information, etc. Potentially, this makes many of the CCAs unenforceable.

 

Rather than come clean and say, "Yes, we screwed up." Egg have chosen to act like a bunch of dodgy second hand car dealers. They won't give you any information that you could use in court against them, whilst at the same time continuing with collections letters and calls.

 

OK, I am playing the same game. I live abroad and so they cannot get me through the County Courts, and whilst they refuse to send me a true copy of my CCA, the credit card account is in dispute anyway.

 

The thing that is sadly lacking in all of this is that they continue to get away with all of this. Where are the regulatory bodies in all of this? Why are ordinary working people being hounded by Egg collections and DCAs, who are openly flouting the law?

[militantconsumer]

Rather than come clean and say, "Yes, we screwed up." Egg have chosen to act like a bunch of dodgy second hand car dealers. They won't give you any information that you could use in court against them, whilst at the same time continuing with collections letters and calls.

 

Does this mean that Egg has stopped its service whereby customers can view a copy of their credit agreement online?

 

I have an agreement from 2000 but I can't see it online. (I am talking about MC's account, not MC's friends account).

[blackntan]

I too have been in correspondence with ARC.

 

I am in a similar position to HP Mum.

 

Egg terminated my acount without default, I was unable to continue making the payments, they then defaulted and terminated me again.

 

I have now received the following from ARC and would be greatful for any advice on how I should respond.

 

Please note that ARC (Europe) Ltd is a debt collection “agent”, acting in good faith on the instructions received from a “disclosed” principal, namely Egg Banking Plc. We are therefore authorised to write to you in connection with the above matter and to instruct solicitors in contemplation of court proceedings where we consider it appropriate to do so. Please note that there has been no “assignment” of the debt from Egg Banking Plc to ARC (Europe) Ltd.

 

We are instructed that our client’s legal department have investigated the issues raised in your letter and there is no section in the Consumer Credit Act relating to the termination of the agreement. The Egg Terms and Conditions enable our client to terminate the agreement which they did as your account was in arrears. You can view the Terms and Conditions on our client’s website at Credit Cards | Saving Accounts | Insurance | Egg.

 

Thanks.

[blackntan]

The letter mentioned in my last post was in reply to Toymakers template at#790.

 

ARC's reply then continues:

 

"We are instructed that the above balance remains outstanding and must be paid. Your payment should be sent directly to this office. Please ensure your payment is made payable to ARC (Europe) Ltd and clearly write your reference number xxxxxx on the reverse, or this may delay it being allocated to your account. Alternetively you can telephone us to make a payment by debit or credit card.

 

 

If we do not receive your payment within the next 10 days, this account will be passed to our solicitors for action."

 

 

This is the end of the first page. It is not signed and may be missing a second page.

[toymaker1]

I too have been in correspondence with ARC.

 

I am in a similar position to HP Mum.

 

Egg terminated my acount without default, I was unable to continue making the payments, they then defaulted and terminated me again.

 

I have now received the following from ARC and would be greatful for any advice on how I should respond.

 

Please note that ARC (Europe) Ltd is a debt collection “agent”, acting in good faith on the instructions received from a “disclosed” principal, namely Egg Banking Plc. We are therefore authorised to write to you in connection with the above matter and to instruct solicitors in contemplation of court proceedings where we consider it appropriate to do so. Please note that there has been no “assignment” of the debt from Egg Banking Plc to ARC (Europe) Ltd.

 

We are instructed that our client’s legal department have investigated the issues raised in your letter and there is no section in the Consumer Credit Act relating to the termination of the agreement. The Egg Terms and Conditions enable our client to terminate the agreement which they did as your account was in arrears. You can view the Terms and Conditions on our client’s website at Credit Cards | Saving Accounts | Insurance | Egg.

 

Thanks.

 

If your agreement was terminated by Egg when it was not in arrears, and no default notice had been sent to you, then I would send a letter something like this:

 

Dear xxxx

 

Thank you for your letter dated xxxxx.

 

In your letter you state that there is no section in the Consumer Credit Act relating to the termination of the agreement. I am extremely surprised and very concerned that ARC, being a debt collection agent licenced by the OFT, appears to be unaware that Part VII of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and in particular section 87, sets out in detail the provisions and requirements of the Act relating to termination of credit card agreements.

 

In light of the fact that ARC appears to be unaware of those sections of the Act relating to termination of credit card agreements, it is clearly not possible for me to respond to the other points raised by you in your letter. In the event that the dispute between Egg and myself is put before a court for adjudication I will draw the court's attention to the fact that ARC, a licenced debt collection agency, appears to believe that there is no section in the Consumer Credit Act relating to termination of credit card agreements.

 

Also, I would be grateful if ARC would provide a response to my request, contained in my letter dated xxxx, for information relating to Egg's termination of it's contractual agreement with me. Specifically I am referring to my request that ARC indicate to me the relevant part of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which provides Egg with legal entitlement to terminate my Egg agreement with effect from 6th March 2008, when no default notice had been served on me in accordance with the provisions of sections 86 and 87 of the Act.

 

In the event that the dispute between Egg and myself is put before a court for adjudication I will draw the court's attention to ARC's refusal to respond to my request for information as outlined above. I consider that my request for that information is very easy to understand, and is directly related to Egg's termination of my Egg credit card agreement in 2008.

 

Yours faithfully xxxxxxx

 

 

 

I'm sorry it seems a bit long winded but I think of how to put it more simpler. You need to be very precise and cover the important points, so that if it goes to court it is very clear which party is in the wrong, and which party has acted correctly, in accordance with CCA 1974.

 

Regards Peter

Edited November 15, 2009 by toymaker1
spelling etc.

[blackntan]

Thank you for your help and quick response Toymaker.

 

I was thinking of a reply along similar lines but I wanted to be sure I was right.

 

To clarify my account was terminated (not in default/ no arrears),defaulted and then terminated again.