Lloyds Tsb Mastercard Cca Received Cannot Read It Help Please

[SkemDosser]

Shelbelle:

They go on to say:

Compliance with section78 is achieved simply by sending me a current version of my agreement,as they have, but they understand that some customers wrongly believe that they are entitled to an original signed copy.

 

It is a misapprehension that section 78 provides debtors with the right to obtain a copy of their original signed agreement. That is not what the CCA provides for and, in fact, there is absolutely no requirement under CCA to provide such a document. Nonetheless, although they have no obligation to do so, we will endeavour to retrieve a copy of the signed agreement for me and will therefore be in touch with me in due course.

 

SD: You may not be 'entitled' to a original copy of the agreement but you have a right to see a true copy of it, and whatever this 'copy of the current agreement' is, it is I am sure most certainly not that.

 

More fob off rubbish.

 

They then point out that the account has been in existence for some time and I have drawn down and repaid debt on multiple ocassions, thereby acknowledging that my agreement is valid and enforceable.

The Bank's agreements have always complied with the requirements of all relevant legislation and they are confidentin their ability to demonstrate this. As such my agreement is enforceable and I should continue to make payments when they become due.

 

Hmmm the 'you used the account therefore you are liable for it' angle which again is rubbish and the usual 'get them to feel guilty' trip.

 

This means nothing so far as the legislation is concerned. If they haven't gort the necessary legal paperwork in place, you've been effectively 'gifted' the money. And remember it's up to THEM to prove they have a legal contract with you, what you have done with the account they've given you has nothing to do with it.

 

I think as consumers we need to be level headed about this and put ourselves in say, the place of a business. If a business discovers it is operating under legally incorrect [or non-existent] contracts, it has no qualms about challenging them and if it saves them money, getting out of them. The courts in such situations, never question the ethics' of this realistic business practise.

 

Us poor consumers are seen further down the pecking order though when it comes to the law, and 'obligation, honour and guilt' are emotions we are supposed to feel and apply when it comes to 'debt'- even when we are not even legally liable for it.

 

Well no more for me, and I hope, for thousands of more every week.

[SHELBELLE]

Spam and Skem

 

Thanks for the advice. I have thought against sending the bank a sarcastic response, just going to wait to see if they come up trumps after 19 months????

 

I had previously started a complaint with OFT anyhow so will just update them of the latest events.

 

That info on the phone calls is priceless, definately going to try something along those lines. It's not that they bother me really, they just interrupt my soaps all the time and it's annoying;).

 

Had one rude bit** yesterday, she just said shelbelle, so I put her in her place told her she had no manners and she didn't know what I meant and then she hung up;).

 

They haven't worn me down yet!!!

 

Cheers

 

S.B.

[SHELBELLE]

Skem

 

Very good points made, and exactly my thoughts.

 

Thank you for your input.....I have given them enough time and effort now the balls in their court, pardon the pun!!!

 

 

Cheers

 

S.B.

[N.P]

When they ring, tell them to "f*$k off", it`s as simple as that! I do. If they ring again, they say "f*$k off, stupid c*&t!"

 

It`s your line, not theirs. If they don`t like the way you speak to them on the phone, they will stop ringing.

 

The contract for your telephone line is for your personal use NOT their business use.

[SHELBELLE]

N.P

 

I am still lol that really made me chuckle:D:D, I can see your point I have been too polite for too long!!!!

 

 

I'll bear it in mind, especially after a cheap galss of vino!!!

 

Thanks

 

S.B.

[kel123]

Hi shel

 

I disagree with NP! A polite, refer to all previous correspondance - thank you and good bye. I did this with these and recorded when and conversations - then went to the fos after as month, and the phone calls stoped completely.

 

If it does eventually go to court and they have recorded you telling them to go forth and multiply, my bet is they will keep that recording! if no others. And imagin how the judge will react if on the form after it says Have you tried to reach an amicable arrangement - No because every time we tried they told us to **** *** and remember at this level it's about feeling and probability.

 

If they have said 'this is our final response' plus 'you are now entitled to contact the fos' and 'you have 8 weeks to do so', you have no other alternative but to go to fos. By not doing so you set your self up to possably loose by default. again I refer to what I said earlier

[N.P]

I`ve had a few Final Responses for the same account, they don`t mean anything. They can write to you at any time.

 

If you have sent them a Telephone Harrassment letter and they have ignored it, then you are well within your rights to tell them where to go. Who do they think they are? Who cares if it goes to court and they tell the Judge your being nasty?

 

You have told them everything in writing. That means, EVERYTHING in writing! It does not mean, you can ring me at 8-9 at night and Sundays too, while I`m doing the dinner!

 

I`ve had two lots of charges and a lump of interest refunded on their numerous `Final Responses`.

[SkemDosser]

Whilst I wouldn't personally 'condone' effing and blinding at a DCA caller- and Kel has a good point about the possible future repercussions- I do absolutely understand the frustration people feel at these calls and in the early days got pretty heated myself, and so fully sympathise with NP's technique lol

 

I think if you have played it by the book, requested that everything is done in writing and complained correctly and officially about telephone harassment and kept your own records up to scratch, there comes a point where the DCA is stepping firmly over the line of reasoanbility and, as NP rightly pointed out, it's your phone account to use as you wish, not theirs. Ok they may possibly keep transcripts to present at court if it gets to that stage, but if you've played the paperwork by the book then it shouldn't stand to much worth and look more like it is...the understandable venting of frustration at being continually harrassed. The argument of Kel's that it is better to be safe than sorry is still sound enough advice though.

 

When I was first in difficulties many years ago now numerous DCA's were calling me mercilessly at work- I pleaded with them to stop, telling them that I was a person in position of some authority in an open plan office etc etc but to no avail. They kept at it. I look back to that now, and wish I'd vented my frustration with a few more choice words than I did at the time lol

 

As for Final Responses, I've had enough of those repeated time and again to make a papier mache pinata pig in the shape of my favourite DCA. They are meaningless most of the time- you get one of their lovely 'Final Responses' then two weeks later...guess what lol

[kel123]

I see a true final response (not all are true final resonses, it's in the wording yet again) as an open door and if your basis for dispute is sound then it's a chance to go for it.

 

I too have felt like giving them what for and I have got extremely angry but two sayings have always stay with me 'don't get angry get even' (24 months ago I had 56K of dept and a court date for the house, DMP 27 years. House is safe and last weeks dmp review 7 years 2 months) and 'if you loose it' (self control) you start slipping nicely in their pocket.

 

But then again we all approach things differently and there are many ways of skinning a cat

[SHELBELLE]

Hi guys

 

You all make very good and valid points, and I guess it's just what an individual feels comfortable with!!!

 

I don't have a problem with the calls it's purely the annoyance aspect and that you take so much time responding and they take no notice but hey ho they are banks and DCA's!!!

 

I think I will go forward with the FO route albeit very long and tiresome, and at least the bank will be charged for the pleasure !!!!

 

Any way lots to digest and thanks once again.

 

I'll keep you all posted!!!

 

Cheers

S.B.

[SHELBELLE]

Oh and Kel, very well done to you, what an achievement!!!!

 

Keep it up !!!!

 

S.B.

[kel123]

Shel that 7y2m may rise if it goes against me next month but one things for sure i'll make [problem] work for it. lol

[SkemDosser]

Very best of luck Kel I'm sure it'll work out!

 

[and you're right- great mantra, don't get mad, get even.]

[SHELBELLE]

Keep on in there Kel, well it's still a huge improvement on your original situation so congrats!! You give it to em girl!!!

 

Yup Skem get even is the right direction, tbh I haven't been mad yet just worrie sick, but we are tackling it all one day at a time thanks to CAG and inspiration like Kel's.

 

"WE ARE FAMILY" as the song goes!!!!

 

S.B.

[SHELBELLE]

Well I think BLS have got bored, despite receiving another threatening letter I have also now received a letter from Wescot, looks like it's doing the rounds..ah well I think that is good news for me as if Lloyds and BLS thought they had a leg to stand on then why sell it on again????

 

 

S.B.

[SkemDosser]

Well I think BLS have got bored, despite receiving another threatening letter I have also now received a letter from Wescot, looks like it's doing the rounds..ah well I think that is good news for me as if Lloyds and BLS thought they had a leg to stand on then why sell it on again????

 

 

S.B.

Yep you'll be firmly in 'uncollectable' file now and you'll just get bounced around the DCA's until you drop off the list.

 

Get into papier mache as a hobby, you're going to get plenty of junk mail to use for it lol

[kel123]

Hi shel

 

Here is my prediction

 

1) westcot couple of phone calls and a couple of threatagrams, then

2) offer of 60% reduction if you clear, then

3) letter off Credit Security Limited, yet another threatagram, then

4) phone call off credit security limited timed just after the threatagram, then

5) some threatagrams and threatacalls from credit security limited, then

6) offer of 60% reduction if you clear

 

Try not to call the poor little girl from credit security limited a lier when she calls because she don't half get upset.

[SHELBELLE]

Skem and Kel

 

Good idea about about papier mache, I 'll give it a thought........

 

Kel thanks for the next change of events I'll make some new dividers for my file and promise not to upset the little girl from credit security unless it's 8.30am on a Sunday when she calls!!!!! Lol !!!

 

Thanks for looking in guys keep you posted, I would be VERY surprised if this ever gets to court now, so good news and hope to be asking a mod to rename my thread with perhaps a "WON" in the title, watch this space!!! Hope I haven't spoken too soon!!!

 

Cheers

 

S.B.

[SHELBELLE]

Hi guys

 

Received a letter from Wescot in response to one I sent them saying the account has been in dispute since 2008 etc etc etc

 

They state please find enclosed a copy of your "application" form to confirm liability. The enclosed document complies with section 78 of the CCA 1974 as it contains all the relevant terms including your name and address, the name of the creditor, the fact that this is a credit card agreement and clearly states that this is a credit agreement, regulated by the CCA 1974. The signature box contains a statement that is a CA and it should only be signed if you want to be legally bound by its terms.

 

They have put the account on hold for 2 weeks to allow me time to contact them to discuss my proposals for repayment, or provide them with the full details of my dispute. If they do not hear from me the accountMAY revert to normal collection as they are not aware of any valid reason for my refusal tp pay.

 

 

Hmmm, well the "Application" is still illegible if nothing else.

 

Any thoughts on how or if I should respond with this one???

 

Many thanks

 

S.B.

[ODC]

Unless it contains ALL the prescribed terms then it is UNENFORCEABLE in a Court.

 

I suggest you tell them that they should read S127 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

They may have proved a debt exists but it is NOT enforceable with the paperwork produced

[SHELBELLE]

ODC

 

Yup exactly.

 

I will put pen to paper at some point today, they've already been told about S127.

 

Do you think I could chuck a letter re CPR 31.14 to them?

 

Thanks

 

S.B.

[ODC]

I wouldnt bother.

 

As you have already informed them of S 127 I would be very brief.

 

Dear Cretins

 

You are aware of my position in regard to this matter.

 

Nothing you have sent me changes that position.

 

yours etc

[SHELBELLE]

ODC

 

Ok, cool, I like it a lot!!!!

 

consider it done.

 

Thanks a million

 

S.B.

[N.P]

Or,

 

Dear Empty Heads,

 

I appreciate your concerns regarding my finances, however, should the provided document prove to be enforceable, then I will only correspond with Lloyds TSB, so sod off and harrass some OAP.

 

[SHELBELLE]

N.P.

 

Lol!!! Thanks.

 

S.B.