Jump to content


CCA wording / signed copy?


trapper
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4638 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

With everything else going on, I am now embarking upon a defence against a bank.

 

I am being taken to court by Shoosmiths, and have gone through the usual S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) procedure. However, I have always assumed that the creditor had to provide a copy of the SIGNED original agreement, but the bank in question sent the following back with the data pack:

 

Re: Request for copy, Credit Agreement under Section 77 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

I refer to your correspondence dated XXYYZZZ, regarding the above Act.

 

Please find enclosed a "true copy" of your credit agreement as requested and a Schedule of Arrears.

 

When responding to requests made under Section 77, the Bank may provide you with a "true copy" of your agreement in accordance with Regulation 3(1) of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 (the "Regulations"). This means that under Section 77, there is no obligation for the Bank to provide you with a copy of the original agreement bearing your signature. A "true copy" does not need to contain any personal information relating to you as the debtor (including your name and address - although we often include this for convenience) nor does it need to include a include a signature box, any signature or dates of signature.

 

I trust this explains the Bank's obligations under Section 77 and is of assistance to you.

 

My question is: As I was relying on a signed copy of the original agreement, can the bank get away with just the wording of the agreement?

 

I do not think they can, as there is nothing to link me with the creditor. Is this correct? If so, what are they trying to prove by the wording of this letter which was sent with the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) pack.

 

I had compiled a rather good defence until I re-read the above letter.

 

Surely they have to supply a copy of the original agreement?

 

As usual, any help appreciated.

Edited by trapper
Clarity!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-reading my post, I am unsure if I got my point across.

 

The bank has sent me a copy of the wording of the agreement, not a copy of the original signed agreement.

 

They have quoted statute, staing they do not have to produce a signed copy.

 

If this is so, how do I prove the agreement existed in the first place?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they wish to enforce an agreement they need to supply a signed true copy that contains all the prescribed terms. In the absence of this, as the OFT have stated, the creditor would have difficulty showing what was in the actual agreement.

If this is so, how do I prove the agreement existed in the first place?
Why are you trying to prove that the agreement existed?

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies Rory, late night typo/mess-up!

 

Question is answered/confirmed: they do have to provide a signed copy to enforce the agreement, however, why did the bank send out that particular wording/quote in the first place?

 

I may be missing something here, but if I request a signed copy of the agreement, why have they sent a letter stating that they do NOT have to send a signed copy?

 

Just need to get this bit of regulation clear in my mind!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds as though they got mixed up. If court action has already been started then you should request information under CPR part 18 (search threads for "cpr letter").

 

It is important to do this as it will help your defence if they don't reply to a cpr 18 letter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi just subscribing

they MUST provide a true SIGNED copy, otherwise how can they claim against you? Its the same as you going to a bank and stating they owe you money, ( now theres a thought). From what I've seen here, no agreement, no debt. Until they produce no court can enforce this.

Good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Hi, Having read this post I am interested to know more.

 

This morning I received and identical letter from the HFC bank, I had previously requested a CCA from Westcott Solicitors but did not receive that now I have received two of these letters for two different accounts.

 

The letter goes on to say " It is reasonable to conclude that you acknowledge this debt"

 

One of the alleged debts I have never made one payment too and have disputed it from day one.

 

The other again says the same thing and encloses a copy of supposed payments for an alleged debt again disputed by me that actually shows that the debt grew between 1998 and 2004 due to charges and again no signed credit agreement has been supplied.

 

I would now like to write back asking that all my repayment, payments be returned to me on the grounds that no legally binding contract has ever been entered into as NO signed credit agreement can be supplied.

 

As I understand the law, these debts are unenforcable and due to the leagal requirement of a valid signature proof of which appears not to exist, I wish to request that all notices of default and mention of these accounts are removed from my credit ratings with Experian, CreditCall and Equifax.

 

What do you think I should do.

 

Please offer some advice.

 

Regards

 

Stephen

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi theeoilyone

First off start your own thread, because this one is a little old, although it'll get bumped up.

If you havent made any payments since 1998, then the account will be statute barred in any case.

So first thing, start your new thread with all your questions. If you can scan the docs they sent you, then do so and post up. BUT make sure you delete all your personal stuff first.

just holler if you need more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re-reading my post, I am unsure if I got my point across.

 

The bank has sent me a copy of the wording of the agreement, not a copy of the original signed agreement.

 

They have quoted statute, staing they do not have to produce a signed copy.

 

If this is so, how do I prove the agreement existed in the first place?

 

3 General requirements as to form and content of copy documents

(1) Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument

or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act

shall be a true copy thereof.

 

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy--

 

(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instrument or other document relating to the debtor,

hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the

Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;

 

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancellable executed

agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of the signature by the debtor of an

agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

 

© in the case of any copy of an unexecuted agreement delivered or sent to the debtor or hirer under section 62 of

the Act, the name and address of the debtor or hirer; and

 

[(d) in the case of any copy of an executed agreement given to the debtor under section 77(1) of the Act for fixedsum

credit, or under section 78(1) for running-account credit, under which a person takes any articles in pawn, any

description of the article taken in pawn.]

 

It actually says they may Omitt bits, where does it actually say it doesnt have to be an exact copy of what you signed :confused: Just curious

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...