Jump to content
Multay

A & L - Enforcable Agreement???

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I have been avidly reading the forums for some weeks now and have to say how impressed I am by the wealth of knowledge on here.

 

I was wondering if I could steal some of your expertise and get an opinion on my problem.

 

I have just recieved a copy of my Credit Agreement from the Alliance and Leicester for my Credit Card.

 

The document is quite a few pages long but appears to comply with requirements. My question is simple - does it?

 

The doc is as follows.

 

Page 1 is titled "credit agreement" and is a photocopy. It has my name, address, credit limit, PPI requirements, consumer credit agreement statement and a handwritten reference number at the top of the page in a pre-printed box.

Page 2 (is also a photocopy) has a big "customer declaration" blurb and signatures of myself and the A&L bod. Also athough there is a reference number box the same as the page before, there has not been any number written in it. - But no-where is there any reference to the intereste rate.

 

The next pages look like the are a current printout of the T&C's that do contain interest rate etc. I have not signed this document at all.

 

As I understand the Consumer credit act, the credit agreement HAS to contain the interest percentage for it to become enforceable.

 

Is this correct?

 

I will scan the document in the next couple of days but until then, any ideas what I should do - Admit deafeat or carry on fighting?...:?

 

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it has no interest rate then it will be unenforceable but it's best to wait until you have scanned and posted them so they can be looked at in detail. Remember to cover over all your personal details before you post.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, should be able to get the original on tomorrow. Assuming this is unenforceable, what should I do next? Send them a letter to tell them so whilst quoting the relevent sections of the credit act?

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can send them a letter informing them that they haven't fulfilled your request and why what they have sent you is unenforceable. It's better to wait until the 12(plus 2) days have passed before you do this, after which time they are in default of your request and you don't have to pay them a penny until they do send you a true copy of the original agreement.

 

People "subscribe" to push your post further up the page for answers. There are some professional "subbers" around here as you can see!:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers,,,,I realised I was being a dumb a*s just after I asked about subs...hehe

 

They are already outside of the 12+2 - I sent the request on the 27th.May...

 

I can't find the interest rate or repayment info anywhere on the signed copy - It's in the T&C's that are attached and obviously a different document from the latest revision not the original - The late fee's and stuff are all 12 quid even though the account was taken out in 2002.

 

Is there a template for the letter I need to send?

 

I will load up the original tomorrow though - Just to be sure before tajing them on...

 

Cheers Guys..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I have attached scans of the docs - I think. Would you be kind enough to have a look and tell me what you think I should do next. I'm assuming I should use one of the standard letter templates but any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

Cheers,

A&L1.jpg

A&L2.jpg

A&L3.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry guys - Tiny thumbnails...How do I use photobucket???Can't find any instructions...

 

Apologies for being a pain in the @rse...:confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never used it but there is a link on here - someone will come along with it:-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Sorted it out.

 

Here is the agreement itself pages one and two.

 

The third page is the First page of the T&C's which are just the latest version.

 

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk44/Multay/AL1.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk44/Multay/AL2.jpg

http://i277.photobucket.com/albums/kk44/Multay/AL3.jpg

 

Hopefully this should be clear enough...Any help is greatly appreciated..

 

Thanks,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is the quality of the document they sent you, it is totally illegible and they must send you a legible copy. The original of this would never be enforceable in court becuase you cannot read it. What they have sent you is an application form - it has no reference to an APR so does not fulfill the requirements for prescribed terms - with a set of Terms and Conditions tagged on that bears no relationship whatsoever to the form. Your application was in 2002 - these Terms and Conditions pertain to agreements after 2004.

Also, it goes from Page 1 to Page 3 then the Terms and Conditions - where are Pages 2 and 4?

 

So there is your letter - they have not fulfilled your request under the CCA 1974 as the document they sent you is 1) illegible 2) an application form without full prescribed terms (don't tell them what is missing - don't do their job for them) 3) is incomplete with pages missing. In addition the Terms and Conditions do not pertain to the alleged agreement and they have not sent you statements as required by the Act. They are now in default of your request and until such times as they send you a true copy of the agreement requested, the alleged debt is in dispute and any enforcement action on their part will be contrary to the CCA 1974, the Administration of Justice Act 1970 Section 40 and OFT guidelines.

 

In other words, they can bog off with this load of cobblers and not return unless they can find a proper agreement!:grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for that Pinky - Didn't even notice the missing page!!!!

 

Do you think the missing page could detail the APR etc? Mind, I suppose if they had it then they would have sent it...;)

 

I'll put together a letter and post it on here before I send it.

 

They have also got RMA on my case with this so I CCA'd them too but they are still ringing everyday and I've had nothing through the post.

It will be interesting to see if they come up with anything different to A&L.Is it woth telling A&L to call their RMA dogs off???

 

Thanks,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Again,

 

Here's my letter - What do you think???????

 

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

 

DO NOT IGNORE THIS LETTER

 

23/06/08

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

 

This account is in Dispute .

 

On 27th.May, 2008 I wrote to A&L requesting that Customer Service supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account.

In response to this request I was supplied a form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

You have not fulfilled my request under the CCA 1974 as the document sent is:

 

1) Illegible

2) Without full prescribed terms.

3) Incomplete with pages missing.

 

In addition the Terms and Conditions do not pertain to the alleged agreement as required by the Act.

You are now in default of your request and until such times as they send you a true copy of the agreement requested, the alleged debt is in dispute and any enforcement action on their part will be contrary to the CCA 1974, the Administration of Justice Act 1970 Section 40 and OFT guidelines.

 

I therefore, request that you also instruct the RMA to cease attempts to claim the alleged debt.

 

The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (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 situation 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.

 

Further more, since the prescribed terms do not appear within the agreement you have supplied, the agreement is rendered totally unenforceable, as the prescribed terms must be contained within the agreement and not a separate document, case law confirms this opinion

 

I refer you to the judgment of TUCKEY LJ in the case of Wilson and another v Hurstanger Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 299

 

”[11] Schedule 1 to the 1983 Regulations sets out the "information to be contained in documents embodying regulated

consumer credit agreements". Some of this information mirrors the terms prescribed by Sch 6, but some does not. Contrasting

the provisions of the two schedules the Judge said:

 

"33 In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under s 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127(3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement. More detailed requirements, which

are designed to ensure that the debtor is made aware, so far as possible, of specified information (including information contained in the

minimum terms) are to be found in Schedule 1."

 

In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, 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”

 

 

As it stands, the document supplied by you is not a valid credit agreement nor is it enforceable by any court

 

Firstly, I require all correspondence in writing from here on; any persistent attempts to contact me by phone will be reported to Trading Standards.

 

I require you to produce a compliant copy of my credit agreement to confirm I am liable to you for this debt, a mere copy of the same agreement will not suffice. If you cannot do so I require written clarification that this is the case.

Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40

 

I respectfully request a response to this letter in 14 days

 

Yours Faithfully,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Babybear - I sent the original on the 27th.May to A&L so allowing for the 14 working days so it ran out on the 17th.June - didn't get this replay till last Thursday so they were outside anyway.

But I sent The CCA request to RMA on the 6th.June - I did it to shut them up really - But it hasn't made any difference!!!

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine letter.

 

Also report them to Trading Standards if they exceed the final calender month to comply using the information in this thread:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/147392-cca-dcas-unfair-commercial.html

Edited by babybear39
forgot something

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corrections - "you are now in default of my request" - and " until such times as you send me" - apart from that - go for it!

 

The CCAs were sent on 27 May so the 12 (plus 2 days) were up on 16 June.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were not talking about the summary criminal offence - we were talking about pursuant action whilst the account is in dispute - and it is now in dispute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I know, I was being helpful by advising the date the OP can report them to TS if they don't comply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the letter is good to go then?????

 

Cheers Gjuys, really appreciate the advice....;0)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please fill in your quit date here

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Tweets

  • Our picks

    • A shocking story of domestic and economic abuse compounded by @BarclaysUKHelp ‏ bank complicity – coming soon @A_Gentle_Woman. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415737-a-shocking-story-of-domestic-and-economic-abuse-compounded-by-barclaysukhelp-%E2%80%8F-bank-complicity-%E2%80%93-coming-soon-a_gentle_woman/
      • 0 replies
    • The FSA has announced large fines against DB UK Bank Limited (trading as DB Mortgages) - DeutscheBank and also against Redstone for their unfair treatment of their customers.
      Please see the links below for summaries and full details from the FSA website.
      It is now completely clear that any arrears charges which exceed actual administrative costs are unfair and therefore unlawful.
      Furthemore, irresponsible lending practices are also unfair and unlawful.
      Additionally there are other unfair practices including unarranged counsellor visits - even if they have been attempted.
      You are entitled to refuse counsellor visits and not incur any charges.
      Any charges for counsellor visits must not seek to make profits. The cost of the visits must be passed on to you at cost price.
      We are hearing stories of people being charged for counsellor visits for which there is no evidence that they were even attempted.
      It is clear that some mortgage lenders are trying to cheat you out of your money.
      You should ascertain how much has been taken from you and claim it back. The chances of winning are better than 90%. It is highly likely that the lender will attempt to avoid court action and offer you back your money.
      However, you should ensure that you receive a proper rate of interest and this means that you should be seeking at least restitutionary damages - which would be much higher than the statutory 8%.
      Furthermore, you should assess whether the paying of demands for unlawful excessive charges has also out you further into arrears and if this has caused you further penalties in terms of extra interest or any other prejudice. This should be claimed as well.
      If excessive unlawful charges have resulted in your credit file being affected, then you should take this into account also when working out exactly what you want by way of remedy from the lender.
      You should consult others on these forums when considering any offer.
      You must not make any complaint through the Ombudsman. your time will be wasted, you will wait up to 2 yrs and there will be a minimal 8% award of interest and no account will be taken of any other damage you have suffered.
      You must make your complaint through the County Court for a rapid and effective remedy.

      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2010/120.shtml
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/redstone.pdf
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/db_uk.pdf
       
      http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/consumerinformation/firmnews/2011/db_mortgages.shtml
      Do you have a mortage arears claim to make? Then post your story on the forum here
      • 0 replies
    • 30 Day Right To Reject - Vehicle Casualty Report. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/415585-30-day-right-to-reject-vehicle-casualty-report/
      • 9 replies
    • I am new here but very glad to find my way here and would welcome any input.
       
      i purchased a brand new campervan conversion from Hillside Leisure (175 miles from our home) on July 26th for £31,000 and, within 48 hours, during a storm, the alarm began to sound incessantly. We could not get it to stop, even after trying everything listed in the manual. We phoned Hillside on Saturday July 28th around 2.00pm. The young man who answered the phone said he would seek the advice of their technician and call us back, which he did. The technician told us that they, Hillside, couldn’t help, but that we should take the van to Nissan (the van is a Nissan) as the fault would lie with one of their components.
       
      • 42 replies
×
×
  • Create New...