Robinson way about to appear

[vengeancedemon]

Well, the 12+2 expired 3 weeks ago, and today I received the following from RW

A photocopy of the application form (Scan 1)

A copy of a Default letter ( no details of anything -perhaps a template

(Scan 2)

A copy of a welcome letter from Crap One but this only, no "page overleaf"

and therefore no T & C

No information on the details required under the CCA request

 

I feel that this does not satisfy my request and as it is out of time is unenforceable

 

Any comments appreciated

[babybear39]

Totally unenforceable IMO.

 

However, if they do come up with something after the time limits, they can enforce.

 

Wait to see if they demand payment. and if they do, come back here and we'll give you a suitable bog off letter

[spiritgirl59]

Well, the 12+2 expired 3 weeks ago, and today I received the following from RW

A photocopy of the application form (Scan 1)

A copy of a Default letter ( no details of anything -perhaps a template

(Scan 2)

A copy of a welcome letter from Crap One but this only, no "page overleaf"

and therefore no T & C

No information on the details required under the CCA request

 

I feel that this does not satisfy my request and as it is out of time is unenforceable

 

Any comments appreciated

 

Hi again vengeancedemon

 

Yes this kind of paperwork sounds very familiar

 

As BB says, if they write again let us know and we can advise on a bog off letter

 

Love SG x

[Tartan Barty]

I have just had a letter from RWC saying they can supply me with a copy of my Crap1 application form but not a copy of the agreement and I should ask Crap1 for it. Shame I have already SAR'd Crap 1 and know they only have the application form. I have sent them a F&F offer which involves them putting the balance to 0 and removing the default and all my details and never contacting me again. Do you think they will go for it???

[spiritgirl59]

I very much doubt it Tartan Barty - they don't seem to like us CAGers who know what we are talking about !!!......they just tend to go very quiet and disappear ... but let us know if you hear anything

[vengeancedemon]

Thank you for your thoughts, I must say I feel that there is nothing in what they have sent me to satisfy a ss78(1) request.

They are at 30 days plus in a weeks time, so for the moment I shall say nowt, I may have on my files the letter to send after 30 days if neccessary, which basically tells them to go forth, how to do it and what will happen to them if they dont, it also requires compliance to a S10 DPA

OR ELSE !!

 

Keep you posted

 

Many many thanks and scale tips all round

[vengeancedemon]

Incidentally, the covering letter ( a template jobbie select the reply)

"Please find attached your signed agreement as requested"

 

Well, the "agreement" is an application form cos it says so on the form and they have, at this point, made no further threat-o-matic comments

[vengeancedemon]

30 days are up today, and nothing more from them, save a letter from Crap one in reply to my question about their letter of assignment obviously sent from RW. They say that this is perfectly in order and that my question regarding an address of an offioce not being sufficient - under section 287 of the companies act, all they have to provide on a letterhead is the registered office

 

Now, should I send RW the letter ( as library) re the 30 days and their now unenforceable position and the Data Protection notice or sit quiet?

[ScarletPimpernel]

Sit back and let them worry about it. Remember that the 30 day offence was removed by CPUTR, so it's just 12 working days now. If they are in default, any demand for payment is unlawful.

[sillygirl1]

Contact your local trading standards and mention my case, it's involving Robinson Way and Capital 1 and has been referred by Sutton Trading Standards to the OFT. If you PM me I can give you the reference no etc, the more Trading Standards realise they can refer to the OFT the better. I might get round to posting the letter I got from Trading Standards on this site later, I can scan it in and edit out any personal info.

[vengeancedemon]

Interesting

So, with the inception of CPUTR (which section please?)

 

the onus is on them to provide and comply with a section 78 request within 12+2 days, and if not then the default scenario as under a 30 day period with the removal of the criminal offence will be automatically in place ie no docs after 14 days, no enforceability ( unless via a court order?)

[babybear39]

The relevant section is the Unfair Commercial Pratices Directive and the OFT can impose fines and or prison sentences for breaches of that and the CPUTR 2008, depening on the severity if the breach.

[vengeancedemon]

Much obliged Ma'am

[JGJ]

Forgive my ignorance but what is CPUTR and to what does it apply??

EXEMPLO DUCEMUS

[sussex1]

subscribing, also having problems with these

[pt2537]

if the Terms and Conditions are seperate from the Application then that is not compliant, the prescribed terms MUST be in the agreement NOT a second document

 

this is clear by section 61(1) (a) which states

 

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

i have highlighted the key words and underlined the most important

 

I recently spoke with Professor Sir Roy Goode Qc about this, this man is the UK's most authoritive expert on the CCA 1974 and his works have been refered to time and time again by the highest courts in the land as being correct

 

in his recent email to me he said

You are quite right. Section 61(1) makes it very clear

that prescribed terms must be in the agreement itself,

not in some other document. This point is emphasized

in Consumer Credit Law and Practice. It is not sufficient

that the terms are in some other document referred to

in the agreement

i have recently started working with a solicitors and have access to Goode: Consumer Credit Law and Practice and i can confirm that this is correct and what the book clearly supports

 

I hope this provides a little help

 

 

 

 

this is a post i made on another thread, i hope it helps

 

 

 

suffice to say that agreement, even with the terms over leaf would be unenforceable

[JGJ]

Apologies again Found doc on guess where CAG. Thanks Scarletpimpernel, Post 34. Consumer Protection (From) Unfair Trading Regulations.

EXEMPLO DUCEMUS

Edited August 30, 2008 by JGJ
Faux Pas

[vengeancedemon]

Very helpful comments to you all

I take it that pre the advent of CPUTR (April 2008) (?) the 30day rule and the potemtial for criminalaction does apply, but for CCA requests post the inception of CPUTR,whilst the 30 days requirement has gone, the onus is now on a 12 + 2 ( 12 if served to DCA by RDelivery) and that the criminal liability of breaching 30 days is removed, but their is a potential criminal liability under otherlegislation

That is apart from the varous other offences that can be committed, ie Admin of Justice, Harassement Act, Offences against the Person Act etc etc

My moral is, always, hit the record button when the telephone rings, if its your lover, well you can always delete it !

[babybear39]

Personally, I have not seen a case of a DCA/bank/financial institution being prosecuted under the 30 rule, so basically I had no faith in it. However, the UCPD and the CPUTR 2008 do have legislation to cover non-comp. of CCA if the debt is persued whislt still in dispute. There is provision for serious offences to allow fines and or imprisonment.

[vengeancedemon]

Thank you very much, I have sent them the 30 day plus Foxtrot Oscar letter, suitably ammended and a stern Statutory notice under s10 DPA

 

Wonder if they will comply and respond?

 

Could be if I am feeling particularly viscious I will pursue them in court under DPA breach and non compliance:D

[vengeancedemon]

OOOOOHH!

letter today from Horrible furrowedly

Passed to them from RW, sevn days to contact etc etc, enclsing some docs, the application form ( as previous post) this time plus page 2 general conditions, and a letter from RW advising account sold to them, dated 28th June This is the first time this letter has appeared and is not a copy seems like an original

 

I have sent HF a suprised that a firm of Solicitors do not know about CCA

particularly as RW have totally ignored all time frames, all letters and a Stat Notice under S10 DPA

[babybear39]

The Notice of Asignment must come from the orginal creditor NOT the DCA

[vengeancedemon]

Had a letter assigning to RW from Crap one dated 26 June

Had a letter from RW seemingly a template variety welcoming me (!) dated 1st July

The letter I refer to came from Horwich F, never been received before, so obviously just printed, the ink was almost still wet!, on entirely new RW headed paper and in the same font etc as HF's letter, why do I think they have manufactured? - this is dated 28th June Seemingly a bit of time travel and duplication involved here

Also, the missing "overleaf" page of the "application (as mentioned in a previous post has suddenly appeared

Is this valid? I am advised that the front page is not enforceable I have attached the "second page" as received, nothing added or deleted just au upload of the obviously a photocopy.

[vengeancedemon]

Just a further quick question,

If the alleged "Agreement" is in fact an application form etc, what is the relevant section of the CCA that covers non enforceable documents? is it ss127 please?

[vengeancedemon]

any thoughts?