Are CapitalOne really this stupid?

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior

[1st Progeny]

ZW

Please forgive my ignorance buts what’s the dirty 13

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior

[ODC]

Seems like CAPONE do not realise their obligations in relation to a CCA request

[babybear39]

Seems like CAPONE do not realise their obligations in relation to a CCA request

 

They're in very good company with most of the rest of the DCAs, OCs, 'solicitors' etc. then

[ashmk]

LOL zazen.warrior, My OH recieved that exact same letter this morning..... Did it have the current terms on the back by any chance ?

 

 

Anyone advise on how to reply to Cap1 on this matter ?

[zazen.warrior]

Yes , current T&C on the reverse and the leaflet they refer to enclosed. All added to my file.

 

No response needed, it's not our problem.

[B3rty]

Letter putting the account in dispute should be the standard reply..

[ODC]

Letter putting the account in dispute should be the standard reply..

Like this epistle from the pen of Curlyben

 

Dear Sirs,

 

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

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

 

You attention is drawn to the fact that this account is subject to a serious dispute. On xx/xx/2007 I requested ********supply me a copy of the credit agreement covering this account pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 78. To date ******** have failed to comply with my request and have totally ignored my written reminders sent via recorded delivery of this fact. Without production of the said agreement I am unable to assess if I am indeed liable for any alleged debt to you or *******, nor does it give me any chance to evaluate whether any original agreement was ‘properly executed’ as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

For the avoidance of any doubt I have included section 78(1) and 78(6) 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.

(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.

 

 

 

Clearly as no agreement was supplied on request, this 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 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..

 

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 ******* 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

 

What I Require.

 

I require that you send me a true copy of the executed agreement 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. I am advised that should you persist in pursuing this debt ignoring the above information you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well

 

No other correspondence will be accepted

 

Should you attempt litigation it will be vigorously defended and the failure to supply documentation under the CCA 1974 is a complete defence to any legal action and your actions will be vexatious and unlawful

 

 

I trust this out lines the situation

 

Regards

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior

[Pinky69]

I got exactly the same thing from them this morning,so, yes - they do appear to be THAT stupid:D

[zazen.warrior]

I can just imagine some disgruntled person on their correspondance team sending the same letter to everyone, whatever their query might be... surely not???

[ODC]

I can just imagine some disgruntled person on their correspondance team sending the same letter to everyone, whatever their query might be... surely not???

Just as they look at their p45. Still next month all the letter will have a Mumbai postmark

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior

[Mrs_Ryan]

Oh dearie me.

 

All Im saying is that all correspondance that comes in is scanned and put onto a system. It is then passed to a specific team who only deal with certain types of correspondance - so theres a team for just about everything. They then have a selection of letters to choose from to 'answer' the query (which quite a lot of the time dont actually) which would explain why ZW and ashmk's OH have recieved the same letter... go figure is all im saying

[empowered]

Sad isn't it? Have had exactly the same bits of paper back from them - have filed them away as by the time I get my PPI back and charges the account should be zeroed anyway.

[Mrs_Ryan]

It is sad. It also gets very boring for those people who have to do the letters.. who by the way are targeted on how many letters they knock out so again... go figure!!!!!!!!!

Good luck with reclaiming the charges people

[ashmk]

My OH recieved another letter this morning which follows the same path as this thread.

I have started my own thread here for anyone intrested.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/138869-cap1-ashmk.html

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior

[jaxads]

"If you do not understand any of the contents of this letter you should consult a qualified solicitor."

 

LOVE IT :D

 

Good luck Zazen

 

I've just responded to a letter from capital one, in which they state they may take legal action against me. I've told them to go for it (it'll save me the problem of coming up the with the court fees up front), as a judge would be interested to see why an account limit of £200 has a balance of £600 --- all made up of lovely unlawful charges

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior

[zazen.warrior]

Post removed.

Edited July 29, 2010 by zazen.warrior