Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Notice how Kev goes about his scam.  In Kahunaburger's case they left the car park well before the time shown on the ticket they had purchased.  But because Kev added on the time taken to look for a parking spot and queue to pay/try to get an internet signal he still sent them an invoice. So If you had left before the Justpark message, say at 3:55, Kev would still have managed to turn that into a stay of 4:06 and thus an overstay and an invoice. Unfortunately for Kev, judges have ruled against his reasoning.  Have a read of this famous case  http://parking-prankster.blogspot.com/2014/03/waiting-for-space-is-not-parking.html  
    • Its okay - It happens. And this is why DCAs  user every trick in the book to try and make you crack.  Now its time to come back.    Im not sure how to proceed if Im honest if they have issued a Letter Of Claim.  Only as You could complain to Oakbrook and they still proceed with Legal Proceedings, but I dont know if that would help or hinder the legal proceedings if they began down that avenue.  I know a FOS complaint wouldnt stop Legal Action and probably run along side it.  But I guess a judge would view a disputed balance with the original creditor as cause for concern whether the DCA's claim is valid?    A bit of a muddle.     
    • That is superb. To answer your question - Dear Mr Dhaliwal Change the sentence - As our disabilities were ignored and disregarded for the time taken I believe this is discrimination against us ... To - As our disabilities were ignored and disregarded for the time taken I believe this is discrimination against us contrary to the Equality Act 2010. Iceland have always been useless, not only in your case but in others, but I think if they realise they are breaking the law it will encourage them to act. I also think the letter is overlong and you could lose the paragraph - I cannot afford any unfair charges of this kind as I am severely struggling financially. I cannot work and am a carer for my disabled Son who also has a mental and mobility disability. I obviously do not have any disposable income and am in debt with my bills. So its an absolute impossibility for me to pay this incorrect charge - as the main points are made elsewhere.  
    • Hands up in the fact that i have probably F***** *P!!
    • Car Finance Awards celebrates best of the industryView the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Halifax sent me an unsigned copy of "an" agreement


Ypnos
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5561 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

Hi all

 

I recently requested from the Halifax a copy of my credit agreement with them (credit card) about 2 months ago. last week they finally sent me a response. In it, they enclosed a standard credit agreement which was just a print out, with no signatures from anyone.

 

They also enclosed a letter stating that this is all they are required to provide under Section 78 of the CCA.

 

I know this is not true and that they need to provide a true signed (by both parties) copy of the agreement. In the meantime, they are still demanding payments from me even though, under Section 78 the debt is unenforcible.

 

Can anyone please give me some direction on how I should proceed from here?

 

Thank you in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 92
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Try this one.

Should get up their noses.

 

Dear xxxxxxxxx

 

ACCOUNT NUMBER:

 

I have this morning **Date** received a copy application form from you.

 

My original Statutory Request to **Bank**, made on **Date** was for a copy of my credit agreement conforming to Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

**Bank** had a statutory time limit in which to reply with the requested information; that limit expired on **Date** at which point **Bank** entered into Default under Section 78 (6)(a) of the Consumer Credit Act.

 

A further statutory time limit expired on **Date** at which point **Bank** failed to comply with Section 78 (1) and thus committed a criminal offence under Section 78 (6)(b) of the Act.

 

The document I have now received (X days after the second time limit expired) does not comply with the Consumer Credit Act requirements for a Properly Executed Agreement. The Section 78 default alone would render the agreement unenforceable and the incorrect documentation merely confirms the fact.

 

I therefore do not acknowledge any debt to **Bank** and do not consider that I have any obligation to make payments to you.

 

I now consider the matter closed.

 

Your faithfully

Be VERY careful whose advice you listen too

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I think the Crminal Offense part was removed under the 2008 revisions - I've been told this now by a few people...May be one to check?

:)** Any opinion expressed by me is given with the best intentions - But I could be wrong so bear that in mind**:)

Missed Call Checker - http://whocallsme.com/Phone-Calls.aspx/077/m

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it was repealed with CCA2006, but bear in mind that's a direct quote from '74 regs and is designed to ram the point home. If they want to argue the toss over the differences then let them.

In all honesty it was never used anyway, so was quite pointless.

Be VERY careful whose advice you listen too

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say that at all.

They have failed to comply with your CCA request and until such time as they do the debt is in default.

They shouldn't take any further action until such time as they comply with your request.

Be VERY careful whose advice you listen too

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest dvdriley

I took out a Mint credit card in 2003. I requested a copy CC which I received. I beleive the agreement is unenforceable. On the credit agreement they sent it states my credit limit as £4500.00. However on the seperate terms and conditions , unsigned, it shows credit limit as £9400.00. These cannot be the terms and conditions sent with the agreement from 2003. Also they are on a seperate piece of paper, not the reverse of the agreeement. The agreement is not signed my them and it only shows interest rate, the rest is data protection stuff. Also the apr is idfferent to the agreement.

 

Also they applied the £1.00 to my account? Whrer do i go now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest dvdriley

took out a Mint credit card in 2003. I requested a copy CC which I received. I beleive the agreement is unenforceable. On the credit agreement they sent it states my credit limit as £4500.00. However on the seperate terms and conditions , unsigned, it shows credit limit as £9400.00. These cannot be the terms and conditions sent with the agreement from 2003. Also they are on a seperate piece of paper, not the reverse of the agreeement. The agreement is not signed my them and it only shows interest rate, the rest is data protection stuff. Also the apr is idfferent to the agreement.

 

Also they applied the £1.00 to my account? Whrer do i go now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest forgottenone

Well, firstly ... you will need to start your own thread, as it will be considered bad form using someone elses thread. Oh, and it means it will confuse issues for the OP as well. Then, so that others here can see whether it's enforceable or not you will need to scan the document, then post it on CAG.

 

;)

Edited by forgottenone
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest forgottenone

By clicking on 'NEW THREAD' at the top of this or any of the other forum pages.

 

Or, even, the bottom! Always on top in my browser. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Nothing at all...Just save your payments up if you can - I have just incase..;)...

They obviously are ignoring your letter that states the account is in dispute..So in dispute it stays until they send you an enforceable agreement...:D

 

However, it will probably get sold to a DCA at some point so just let us know when that happens and we can give you a couple of letters to send to them too...

 

But other than that, the onus is on them to respond and until they do you can't do anything - Enjoy the silence my friend...

 

M

:)** Any opinion expressed by me is given with the best intentions - But I could be wrong so bear that in mind**:)

Missed Call Checker - http://whocallsme.com/Phone-Calls.aspx/077/m

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi

Got an update on this

 

 

I've had a reply from Halifax. They have apparently investigated the issues I have raised and they do _not_ accept my following "claims":

That their automated phone system broke any regulations

That calling me every hour from 8am to 9pm is harassment

That the unsigned copy of the credit agreement does not comply with the relevant

They have also enclosed another copy of another unsigned credit agreement plus all statements since I took out this card in 2004.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I have received further correspondence.

 

1 letter saying that I am in arrears. Then 1 letter saying they're taking me to court and then 1 letter basically repeating what their last letter (which I posted about on 11 Dec 2008 in this thread).

 

They have still not provided a signed copy of an agreement, but they have enclosed copies of my credit card statements.

 

Where do I stand with this? Do I have a snowball's chance in court?

 

The phone calls have stopped, so I'm not too bothered about that - I'm just worried about the court. I don't mind going if I know I can win. Is it time for me to find a solicitor?

Link to post
Share on other sites

this should do the trick:-

 

 

Dear Sir or Madam

 

 

On (date) i wrote to you making a request inder the consumer credit act 1974, this request was for you to provide me with a signed true copy of my credit agreement with (name of company).

As you should be aware, when such a request is made, you have 12+2 days in which to respond by providing the document, your deadline for doing this ran out on (date), and, as you have not provided me with the document i requested, i now place this matter into a state of default.

 

You should note that while this matter is in default...

 

You are not allowed to request payment from me, nor am i obliged to make any offer of payment.

You may not add charges or interest to the account for any reason.

You may not attempt to instigate legal action against me.

You may not pass or sell this matter on to another agency.

 

Any attempts by yourselves to pursue any kind of legal action, as described by yourselves in your letter dated (date), will be considered both unlawful and vexatious, and will result in a counter claim being made against you for harassment.

 

Also, having taken legal advice, you should note that until you can provide me with a valid credit agreement, any pursuit of this matter by yourselves is in violation of the administration of justice act 1970 (section 40), and thus is punishable under law.

 

From the date of this letter, any furthur correspondance or attempted contact from yourselves, in whatever form, with regards to this matter is refused until such time as you can provide me with the requested documentation as proof of your right to collect on this alledged debt.

 

 

Goodbye

(print name dont sign)

 

print off, send to them by recorded delivery, they cant do a damn thing, especially take court action against you, as all that would happen would be the judge would ask them to provide a valid CCA, which they wont be able to do, then the claim would be thrown out of court, youd be awarded costs and theyd look very silly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Post up the agreement they sent you. They only have to send you a 'true' copy of the original agreement and the regulations specifically allow removal of any signatures or other security info. What they have to do is produce in court an identical copy with signatures. Wee need to see the agreement to see if it fails as an agreement on its content with or without signatures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...