MBNA won't accept written correspondence only...

[lexis200]

This one was received on the 5th.

 

We may not have spoken to you for a while but you have previously advised us of your financial difficulties; as a result MBNA are currently suppressing all fees and interest on your account. However, you must be aware that you are not on a formal reduced payment programme, which means that your account is continuing to fall into arrears, but we want to help you resolve this.

 

Whilst MBNA understands your difficlt circumstances, it is our duty to inform you that due to the seriousness of the arrears (we're talking a couple of hundred quid!), if we cannot set a level of re-payment that is suitable for you we will be required to charge off your balance as a bad debt. This does not relieve you of the responsibility of repaying the full amount outstanding, which will be legally assigned to a Third Party for recover action. You should also be aware that a Default will be registered on your credit file for the next six years.

 

We would like to avoid these actions and provide you with an pooprtunity to begin a redced payment arrangement, which will reduce your debt and begin building a good credit history.

 

To do this we require you to call today so that we can discuss the situation and set a pwymant programme for you. There are many ways that we can help you but we need to spead with you to do this. It may be we just need a small increase on what you are currently paying.

 

In the meantime we appreciate that you are making every effort to continue addressing the situation by at least making some level of payment to your account.

 

Yours

 

Another Head of Customer Assistance (that makes two so far for us, I know we have a way to go to beat the four or five some people have had:))

 

So then, on the face of it, actually a pretty helpful letter. Polite, non threatening (well, compared with others) and despite being a template, rather more personal - especially the last paragraph which makes you think they may be listening a bit.

 

I have a few niggles though (naturally:-D)

 

Firstly, they have been informed many times OH cannot afford any more than is being offered (which is completely truthful, we really can't), so this 'small increase' bit is completely defunct. They've already quoted they need about 4 times what's been offered. We can't offer £4 more, let alone 4 times!

 

Secondly, this bit about it being written off as a bad debt and then being assigned. Is that right? I thought that when a debt was written off as bad, it meant the company could claim on it (either insurance or tax or something??). I assumed that if they did this, they couldn't then sell it on as that would mean they were being compensated twice? Or does the fact they say assigned make it ok (I'm not sure if assigned and sold are different:???

 

Thirdly, since then we've had the CCA back which they didn't supply the original terms with, so as that's not been done correctly I thought they couldn't sell/pass on etc to a DCA, or Default the account? Obviously though it came 2 days after that letter was written so I can't blame them for that bit at that time.

 

I'd like to reply to this one saying that the CCA hasn't been complied with so most of what they say is toothless at the moment. I do need to know though, has what they've sent me complied with the Act, but is just not enforceable without the original terms, or have they not complied at all due the the terms being different by several years?

 

As I mentioned before, it looks like they have the prescribed terms on it so I have nothing there, but the rest of the terms aren't on the agreement at all (but are referenced in the section on the left).

 

Also, having looked at another thread, I've found what they may omit, which includes the creditors signature unless: © 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; The poster (thanks foolishgirl) then goes on to explain "The omissions permitted are only those in 2(b). Name & address omission is not permitted under 2 © as you have to assume the agreement was executed in order for them to be applying it." The agreement OH had did not have a signature (that I could see) from the creditor, and it was sent to OH, not done in person. I think this means they had to have had their sig somewhere on that sheet:???:

 

Sorry for the long post(s)! I'd just like to know how to proceed with this - specifically have they complied and it's not enforceable, or have they just not complied - and get it moving along asap.

 

Thanks:)

[Hopeful1]

Okay,

 

Just a little update as I've been snowed under with youngest's birthday party for the last week (and we got the day with the good weather - yay!).

 

OH has had two letters - I'll do them in separate posts so questions don't get mingled/lost. Also, I'm typing as I haven't had time to get the scanner up, so please excuse any typos:)

 

On the 27th of August OH had 1st letter:-

 

IMPORTANT DEFAULT NOTIFICATION

 

You are in breach of the agreed Terms and Conditions and a decision has been made to place a restriction on your account. This means that your card cannot be used. If you have regular transactions you should use an alternative method of payment.

 

As you account is £*** in arrears, failure to bring you account up to date will also result in the eventual termination of the agreement and the registration of a Default at the Credit Reference Agencies. (It then tells me the pitfalls of this happening over several sentences.)

 

IT'S NOT TOO LATE TO PREVENT THE TERMINATION OF YOUR AGREEMENT.

 

Call us now to make a debit card payment. Alternatively, contact us to ensure we can provide you with information to help you deal with your finances, including actions you need to take to stop the Default being registered against you. We also have leaflets available to you that detail your options.

 

Furthermore, the restriction that has been placed on your account does not have to be permanent etc.

 

Please note if a restriction is in place when your balance is cleared in full, the account will register as closed with the CRA's.

 

From my intensely unhelpful friend Mr McGrath, Head of Customer Assistance.

 

So, the couple of points I need to raise in a letter of response are (I think) that a) I don't have a copy of the terms and conditions mentioned in the first para, and b) there are only arrears on the account as they continued to add charges and interest for the best part of 6/7 weeks - OH was under the limit when he requested a payment plan and not due to make a minimum for a couple of weeks after sending the initial letter, so they had plenty of time to stop the charges etc.

 

Also, can anyone tell me the meaning of an account showing as 'closed' with the CRA's? Is this a good note or not, as I've also seen 'settled' and a couple of other similar descriptions?

 

Right, on to number two...

 

Well this letter means nothing and is just about them putting on pressure. It isn't a proper default notice which is the main thing.

 

I'm not sure what 'closed' means - sorry!

[Hopeful1]

This one was received on the 5th.

 

We may not have spoken to you for a while but you have previously advised us of your financial difficulties; as a result MBNA are currently suppressing all fees and interest on your account. However, you must be aware that you are not on a formal reduced payment programme, which means that your account is continuing to fall into arrears, but we want to help you resolve this.

 

Whilst MBNA understands your difficlt circumstances, it is our duty to inform you that due to the seriousness of the arrears (we're talking a couple of hundred quid!), if we cannot set a level of re-payment that is suitable for you we will be required to charge off your balance as a bad debt. This does not relieve you of the responsibility of repaying the full amount outstanding, which will be legally assigned to a Third Party for recover action. You should also be aware that a Default will be registered on your credit file for the next six years.

 

We would like to avoid these actions and provide you with an pooprtunity to begin a redced payment arrangement, which will reduce your debt and begin building a good credit history.

 

To do this we require you to call today so that we can discuss the situation and set a pwymant programme for you. There are many ways that we can help you but we need to spead with you to do this. It may be we just need a small increase on what you are currently paying.

 

In the meantime we appreciate that you are making every effort to continue addressing the situation by at least making some level of payment to your account.

 

Yours

 

Another Head of Customer Assistance (that makes two so far for us, I know we have a way to go to beat the four or five some people have had:))

 

So then, on the face of it, actually a pretty helpful letter. Polite, non threatening (well, compared with others) and despite being a template, rather more personal - especially the last paragraph which makes you think they may be listening a bit.

 

I have a few niggles though (naturally:-D)

 

Firstly, they have been informed many times OH cannot afford any more than is being offered (which is completely truthful, we really can't), so this 'small increase' bit is completely defunct. They've already quoted they need about 4 times what's been offered. We can't offer £4 more, let alone 4 times!

 

Creditors always keep pushing for more.

 

Secondly, this bit about it being written off as a bad debt and then being assigned. Is that right? I thought that when a debt was written off as bad, it meant the company could claim on it (either insurance or tax or something??). I assumed that if they did this, they couldn't then sell it on as that would mean they were being compensated twice? Or does the fact they say assigned make it ok (I'm not sure if assigned and sold are different:???

 

They mean they will write it off as not worth chasing and hand it over to a DCA. They shouldn't do this if they haven't complied with a CCA request or if the account is disput.

 

Thirdly, since then we've had the CCA back which they didn't supply the original terms with, so as that's not been done correctly I thought they couldn't sell/pass on etc to a DCA, or Default the account? Obviously though it came 2 days after that letter was written so I can't blame them for that bit at that time.

 

On an account this age there should be relevant t & cs provided as far as i know. I don't think it's necessary anymore on more recent accounts, but can't remember where i read this.

 

I'd like to reply to this one saying that the CCA hasn't been complied with so most of what they say is toothless at the moment. I do need to know though, has what they've sent me complied with the Act, but is just not enforceable without the original terms, or have they not complied at all due the the terms being different by several years?

 

I'm not very confident with agreements so i will see if someone else can have a look. I'd hate to lead you the wrong way.

 

As I mentioned before, it looks like they have the prescribed terms on it so I have nothing there, but the rest of the terms aren't on the agreement at all (but are referenced in the section on the left).

 

Also, having looked at another thread, I've found what they may omit, which includes the creditors signature unless: © 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; The poster (thanks foolishgirl) then goes on to explain "The omissions permitted are only those in 2(b). Name & address omission is not permitted under 2 © as you have to assume the agreement was executed in order for them to be applying it." The agreement OH had did not have a signature (that I could see) from the creditor, and it was sent to OH, not done in person. I think this means they had to have had their sig somewhere on that sheet:???:

 

Sorry for the long post(s)! I'd just like to know how to proceed with this - specifically have they complied and it's not enforceable, or have they just not complied - and get it moving along asap.

 

Thanks:)

 

I'll pm someone to ask if they can have a look, so give it a couple of days and see if you receive a reply.

[Having_A_Knightmare]

Not read any of this thread so not sure whats going on.

 

I can see Image 2 &3 of the scanned copy. If that all youve got totally unenforcable as there is no terms and no signature.

 

Like you say they have added new T&C not the old ones.

 

HAK

[Having_A_Knightmare]

looks like the front page is missing and thats got all the info on:confused:

[Hopeful1]

Thanks for that HAK

 

Lexis, i haven't sent anyone a pm, but have posted your thread link on a large but useful thread about credit agreements.

 

The post with your link is here just in case you want to dip in and out of the thread

[lexis200]

Thanks both of you, much appreciated.

 

I'm not sure what happened with the first image - hopefully this'll work now as you're right, it has all the relevant stuff on it.

mbna1.jpg - Image - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

 

I have been in and out of the thread you posted for a while now Hopeful1, but so far up to only about page 500:eek: I'll have to fast forward a bit to see if there's any nuggets turn up!

 

I'll hold fire for a couple of days and see what happens. I need to be doing some actual work rather than composing letters anyway I suppose, but it's not half as interesting:rolleyes:

[Chalkitup]

Hello,

 

Not read your thread yet but I have had a quick look at your front page and it does not look right. Are they saying that is the whole front page as it was when you signed it??

I have MBNA docs from around 2000 (I believe this was 2001 .... is that correct?) and they all have the ref numbers at the bottom of the page right over to the left hand side ..... your NEPC01 ref number is out of place. As if the left hand column has been added!! Also when magnified the top line of print is uneven. Is there any chance of a better scan (when I magnify this present one I can not read it correctly) as I can not read certain parts that I believe will clear this matter up ... one way or the other.

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

[lexis200]

Hi Chalkitup

 

Thanks very much for the reply.

 

Yes, the account was from October 01 - and the terms bit on the left has 04/01 D on it, which I presumed was the date, which would tally pretty much.

 

They've stated this is 'a copy of your credit card agreement, including applicable terms and conditions', so I'd say they're saying it's as OH signed it:)

 

Your comment about the ref. no. is interesting though - it's about 1/4 of of the way into the page on this.

 

I'm not sure about the uneven print - I can't see what bit you mean as it all looks ok to me??

 

I've just got hubbie to scan at 600dpi which makes it pretty massive, and hopefully you can see it here - RapidShare: Easy Filehosting

 

When you click the link you need to click free user, then wait about 30 seconds before you can download the image.

 

If the front page is ok, could I still rely on the terms being from the wrong period, seeing as they're pointed to several times in the terms bit on the left hand side, and the lack of a sig from them?

 

Thanks again

 

lexis

[Chalkitup]

Hi Chalkitup

 

If the front page is ok, could I still rely on the terms being from the wrong period, seeing as they're pointed to several times in the terms bit on the left hand side, and the lack of a sig from them?

 

Thanks again

 

lexis

 

Hello Lexis200,

 

The prescribed terms seem to be in the column down the left hand side. Hence I do not think you would get far relying on the T&Cs they also sent being from the wrong period.

 

As for no signature ....... this is what peterbard recently wrote ....

 

The signatures on an agreement are not a prescribed term.

The absence of the creditors signature does not breach section 127 so can not be used to render the agreement automatically unenforceable.

Many people have tried to question the proper execution of the agreement under section 65 and 60 when there is no creditor’s signature, without success. It is unfortunately up to the court to decide in these cases.

If the creditor presents a signed (by the lender) document to the court, whether it is a copy or an original you still have the right to challenge its validity. The question is would the judge on waying the balance of probabilities believe you.

 

I am still looking into the frontpage they sent you as I have never seen one like that before and have asked hopeful1 to point me towards others to compare certain things.

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

[lexis200]

Thanks Chalkitup

 

I must admit I'm a bit baffled that they can put throughout the application 'refer to section x of your t's and c's', but then send new terms. How does this work with variations etc, as if you can't see the originals how do you know what they can and can't vary? Especially as in the bit above the signature form it has 'you agree that we may process, use, record and disclose personal information as described in condition 11' I have no idea what that condition is as I don't have the terms they refer to:rolleyes:

 

I did think this was a bit of a sticky wicket with the prescribed terms and the signature, but wanted confirmation, so thanks for that:) I've just spent the last few hours trawling through more of the 12000+ page post, and funnily enough have just got to a large chunk debating the signature aspect - the upshot of which was exactly what you have just said, basically that you could take it to court on that alone, but the judge would almost certainly allow it anyway as it could be executed there and then. Ho Hum:)

 

Thanks again for taking the time to help, I appreciate every response.

[Hopeful1]

Thanks Chalkitup

 

I must admit I'm a bit baffled that they can put throughout the application 'refer to section x of your t's and c's', but then send new terms. How does this work with variations etc, as if you can't see the originals how do you know what they can and can't vary? Especially as in the bit above the signature form it has 'you agree that we may process, use, record and disclose personal information as described in condition 11' I have no idea what that condition is as I don't have the terms they refer to:rolleyes:

 

I did think this was a bit of a sticky wicket with the prescribed terms and the signature, but wanted confirmation, so thanks for that:) I've just spent the last few hours trawling through more of the 12000+ page post, and funnily enough have just got to a large chunk debating the signature aspect - the upshot of which was exactly what you have just said, basically that you could take it to court on that alone, but the judge would almost certainly allow it anyway as it could be executed there and then. Ho Hum:)

 

Thanks again for taking the time to help, I appreciate every response.

 

Lexis, while you are unsure i would start planning your next move to keep them off your back. If you send a S.A.R request make sure it is the one that also asks for a copy of the agreement just to see what they come back with. I've had one company who sent me something different, so you never know

 

By sending for a s.a.r be clear that the account is in dispute until you have ascertained the true balance (this is a strategy i've used to buy some time). Reclaim the charges, but after that, if you're not sure whether or not the agreement is enforceable you will have to think about a repayment plan.

 

Let me know if you need a link for the s.a.r

[lexis200]

Thanks hopeful1:)

 

Just one question though - how do I get away with saying the account is in dispute if I'm not sure if the agreement is enforceable or not? I thought that them was not complying with the CCA properly was what gave you the grounds for stating dispute status, or am I confusing matters (again:D)?

 

Honestly, the more I read the more confused I'm becoming...this is on the massive thread as a response to what a judge would say to current t's and c's being sent rather than originals (similar to my agreement, everything else looks ok) "Yes, he'd say that they can't enforce while in default and need to comply with the s.78 request, including original T&C's." But then there's arguments saying that's not quite right. I feel like Dory in Finding Nemo, but instead of 'just keep swimming' I've got 'just keep reading, just keep reading' going round my head;)

 

(How to tell when you've not been round adults enough - the only analogy you can come up with is from a childrens film!)

 

I'd appreciate the link for the S.A.R please so I know I have the right one!

 

Thanks again:)

[lexis200]

Okay, I think I might have answered the terms and conditions concern I had (I know you had already stated as much Hopeful1, and I wasn't ignoring your advice, but I don't have the balls yet to have a go at the banks without knowing what I'm stating)

 

I've just found a link to the CCA '74, which I haven't seen (but am now reading through); specifically section 1

 

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,—

 

Am I reading it right that the 'any other document referred to in it' would encompass the t's and c's, which would therefore need to be the originals?

 

Is that what you were getting at in earlier posts Hopeful1?

[Hopeful1]

Hi Lexis. It is confusing. I've been around this site for over a year and i still don't understand everything!

 

You should be sent a copy of the origianl agreement which should be linked to the original t and cs. What is confusing with yours is that there are t and Cs on the side of the doc but they have sent additional t and cs that obviously aren't right. It's the bits down the side that is making it difficult for people to decide. From various people's experience in court, judge's are very unpredictable and we're all aware of that.

 

That is why i say if you are not sure, then make plans to pay as creditors are very quick to go to court at the moment.

 

When i said about saying the account is in dispute in relationship to the S.A.R. I used that argument when i was reclaiming charges. I said i would make a payment arrangement when i knew what the exact balance was ie when they returned my charges It really is your decision how you do this. It has to be what you and your partner are comfortable with.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/payment-protection-insurance-ppi/118145-r-subject-access-request.html

[Chalkitup]

Hi Lexis. It is confusing. I've been around this site for over a year and i still don't understand everything!

 

You should be sent a copy of the origianl agreement which should be linked to the original t and cs. What is confusing with yours is that there are t and Cs on the side of the doc but they have sent additional t and cs that obviously aren't right. It's the bits down the side that is making it difficult for people to decide. From various people's experience in court, judge's are very unpredictable and we're all aware of that.

 

Hello,

 

Thank you Hopeful1 for the link in PM.

 

Lexis .... Sorry if I have confused you with my views but Hopeful1 is spot on with the above post. If it was not for the terms down the side of your "agreement" then you would be ok. But those terms on the left have the "prescribed terms" within them ... so if MBNA produced that in court and your argument was just about the other T&Cs being from the wrong time I believe you would be on a very sticky wicket.

However I am still looking into the front page they sent as when printed out on A4 it does not look correct. But that might just be my mistrust of MBNA.

If anyone else reading this has an "agreement" like the one Lexis has been sent please could they contact me.

 

Thanks

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

[Hopeful1]

However I am still looking into the front page they sent as when printed out on A4 it does not look correct. But that might just be my mistrust of MBNA.

If anyone else reading this has an "agreement" like the one Lexis has been sent please could they contact me.

 

Thanks

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

 

CIU - Please let me know if you come up with anything and i will do the same for you. I would put money on those agreements not being the real thing. It's just proving it that's the problem.

 

Happy detecting!!

[lexis200]

Riiiight.....I think I get this now (do I hear shouts of at last:))

 

The basic fact is that they are under a legal obligation to send OH the form with the prescribed terms and the original t's and c's (well, a copy of).

 

HOWEVER - if the form has all the prescribed terms and OH's signature on it, that is the important bit. It does technically need the original t's and c's as well, but this would be a toss up in court as despite the fact it is a necessary part of the request under the CCA '74, you need to know what you're talking about in order to argue the point - and in any case you could well find your judge has less idea than you and can't see why new terms aren't much help.

 

SO - while they haven't sent the original t's and c's they still haven't complied with the CCA request and the account is in dispute, (meaning they shouldn't Default etc), but there is nothing to stop them taking OH to court as it could be declared enforceable by the court.

 

Am I getting close yet?

 

As we stand at the moment, we are paying them the amount we offered in the payment plan shown to them (as a pro-rata payment). This is what they're really trying to get us to increase on, which we can't. At all. We've been paying that since this started, and they have been informed in writing and over the phone that we would be doing that, so they haven't been blindsided on it!

 

We'll carry on paying that amount, and if they really want to go further they'll have to explain themselves to a judge as to why they're pushing for money we obviously don't have. In the meantime though I'll see if a S.A.R throws anything up. (thanks for the link btw, you're a star:))

 

One last thing - while these t's and c's are still outstanding, can they pass the debt on or issue a Default, as they haven't fully complied? Just so as I know if I can bring this up if they mention it again.

 

Thanks again - it's getting clearer little by little

Edited September 13, 2008 by lexis200
typo

[lexis200]

Sorry, last post was typed intermittently over the course of today so I hadn't seen either of the latest replies.

 

I understand a little better now that whilst both items are requirements, the t's and c's are rather less imperative and can be got round by the banks.

 

Thanks both of you for taking so much time over this - it's so appreciated, as I'd have given up at the first hurdle without the backup on here. And with MBNA in particular I really really want to be able to tell them where to go as they've been so monumentally unhelpful (but obviously without getting into any strife whatsover myself:p) If only!!

[Hopeful1]

Just a quick reply as off to make a dream catcher with the little one!

 

The prescribed terms are part of the terms and conditions eg credit limit, interest rates etc. Because your doc has the terms and conditions on the side, we are saying it would probably be enforceable on those grounds.

 

If they hadn't put that bit on the side and had ONLY sent the seperate terms and conditions, we could have easily said said that it wasn't enforceable, 'cause they weren't the terms and conditions you signed up to, they are new ones.

 

The new terms and conditions they sent you seperately are confusing - why did they send them when there are terms and conditions on the agreement?

 

Chalkitup and i are suspicious, because of this and the fact that most old MBNA agreements have been nowhere near enforceable. All have been application forms quite clearly without any attempt at including ANY prescribed terms. We think it's odd that suddenly you and someone else have old agreements that appear to be enforceable.

 

I hope this makes a little more sense - it is a minefield, i know!

 

Keep going with the payments.

 

I suggested the S.A.R not only to reclaim charges but to see if you can catch them out. I've done this with one company and ended up with 2 agreements which were basically the same APART from my sig on one is completetely different and has additional words on it.

 

The moral of the story? You just never know what might turn up if you keep digging

[lexis200]

Just a quick reply as off to make a dream catcher with the little one!

 

Hehe, I've got one of those to do with my youngest too as he had one for a pressie last week:)

 

Thanks for keeping on with your suspicions for me though!

 

Have fun making your dreamcatcher:)

[lexis200]

Hello again:)

 

Just a quickie this time -

 

Do I have to get hubbie to put his actual signature on an SAR, or can I use the digital one I made up for him?

 

I know on the CCA request you don't have to give a specimen, but I don't know about this?

 

Thanks!

[Chalkitup]

Hello again:)

 

Just a quickie this time -

 

Do I have to get hubbie to put his actual signature on an S.A.R - (Subject Access Request), or can I use the digital one I made up for him?

 

I know on the CCA request you don't have to give a specimen, but I don't know about this?

 

Thanks!

 

Hello Lexis,

 

This is a good point you have raised .....

 

Just recently if MBNA receive a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) they are very quick to point out Section 7(3) of the Data Protection Act 1998 .... which basically says MBNA should respond to your request when they have received the information necessary to fulfil the request. They then ask for a copy of your id ... copy of your driving licence / passport to show your signature.

 

Now a lot of people on here will say never give them a proper signature .... others slightly change the way they sign so they will realise if the signature has been copied and pasted .... Not that I am saying any company would do such a thing ..... However I do the following which makes it very difficult to copy and paste the signature .....

Firstly on the letter print a line as so ...

 

x_ _ _ # _ _ _ x _ _ _ # _ _ _ x

 

Then sign right across it.

 

The choice is yours .... but I am sure MBNA will ask for more id if you send a digital signature.

 

Onwards and Upwards

 

Chalkitup

[Hopeful1]

Hello again:)

 

Just a quickie this time -

 

Do I have to get hubbie to put his actual signature on an S.A.R - (Subject Access Request), or can I use the digital one I made up for him?

 

I know on the CCA request you don't have to give a specimen, but I don't know about this?

 

Thanks!

 

NO NEVER EVER SIGN ANYTHING

 

Sorry to shout!

 

Some people are very handy with photoshop!

 

Always use your digital sig or i just type my name. Another trick i've tried is to do a different signature with obscure dots or lines. Something that would make it clear it's not my normal sig and i've then photocopied it so i know what i did.

 

This money stuff makes you become very devious

[Hopeful1]

Sorry, Chalkitup and i seem to be working in tandem these, but at least we both agree Good teamwork i say