Barclaycard debts

[MrMT]

Has anyone got any words of wisdom on my position? I am 110% sure Barclays have no evidence to support their "1985 declaration". Should I respond/challenge Barclays latest reply or maybe just move on to a Subject Access Request (which I can ill-afford)?

 

EDIT: How cool is that!!! Type the abbreviation (S)(A)® and the website spells it out

[rory32]

Just a thought.. .but wouldnt it be best to PM whatever you want to say to the person... if you keep it off the forum then the sharks might not get to hear it for a while and more people might get the same letter in response to requests..... thus helping more people

Advice by PM is actively discouraged as it can not be corrected if it is wrong. Also there would be no threads for people to read to learn from as well as the posibility of people touting for business and disinformation being distributed.

 

Just a thought as the forum seems to be daily reading for DCA's and CC companies these days

Correct and they know how to use the PM function too.

Has anyone got any words of wisdom on my position?

Send them the following.

Dear Sirs,

 

Account Number: XXX

 

Re; your recent reply to my request under section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

I note that you have replied to the above by sending a copy of your companies current terms and conditions I must inform you that this is not sufficient to comply with the request and that your company is still in default under the act.

 

To clarify, just sending the Terms and Conditions is a breach of the Act and Regulations as, apart from the information that the Regulations provide that you may exclude, the copy must be a "true copy" of the agreement.

 

This breach of the agreement can be demonstrated as follows;

 

As you will know section 180(1) (b) authorises, "the omission from a copy of certain material from the original, or the inclusion of certain material in condensed form." This refers to statutory instruments made under the heading Copies of document regulations and in this care in particular to SI 1983/1557.

 

Before leaving section 180 there are two other sections that should be remembered these are:

 

Section 2(2) (a) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not satisfied unless the copy supplied is in the prescribed form and conforms to the prescribed requirements;

 

And more importantly

 

Section 2(b) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not infringed by the omission of any material, or its inclusion in condensed form, if that is authorised by regulations.

 

You will see that this quite clearly states that whilst certain items may be left out of the copy document the rest of the document must be in the form and contain all items as prescribed by the regulations.

 

Turning to the regulations regarding what may be omitted from these copies these are contained with SI 1983/1557.

 

The regulations state:

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy-

(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instrument or other document relating to the debtor, hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancelable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of signature by the debtor of an agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

 

It is quite clear what can be omitted from the copy document, this again asserts that all other details of the agreement should be presented in form and content as required by the regulations.

 

The requirements of the Agreement regulations 1983/1553 are very explicit in describing the form and content of an agreement and this as I have demonstrated also applies to the copy of any such agreement with the above mentioned proviso.

 

Nowhere within these regulations does it state that part of the agreement can be presented on a separate document headed terms and conditions.

It does state that all terms and conditions should be within the agreement document and is explicit of the form in which it is presented.

 

I hope this explains why your reply was unacceptable.

 

I await a true copy of my agreement and would remind you again that whilst the request has not been complied with the default continues.

 

Yours faithfully

[MrMT]

Sorry to ask this but I don't feel comfortable not fully understanding the main points, legalese makes my head hurt so I'm extremely glad to have you on my side.

 

Please correct me if I've got this wrong;

Barclays are using the Consumer Credit Regulations 1983 as a get-out-clause to providing me with the original agreement by claiming the agreement began before May 1985 and that the current agreement is legally acceptable? (I haven't read the current agreement but I suspect it doesn't relate to any agreement they think I have with them anyway!)

From what I can make of the letter you're advising I send, I get the impression Barclays are mistaken/bluffing and still have to produce the original CCA, albeit without some of the prescribed terms?

[bazaar]

Hi MrMT

yes they are bluffing, if they wanted to use pre 85 legislation, they would have had to notify you. If it was really long before 85 then they would have had to contact you asking for your authorisation to issue you with a new agreement. For some bedtime reading go to this link:

http://www.competition-commission.org.uk/rep_pub/reports/1980/fulltext/127c01.pdf

 

You can change the last number to 2 and so on to get the full documents.

I'm still digesting myself, as helping someone else with it, but if they want to hide behind old legislation then, we should be able to use it against them likewise.

[bazaar]

OK MrMT

they say ' we can send a copy of your CURRENT executed credit agreement'

Well if that s the case where's your signature on this 'current' agreement.

Someone will give you a suitable response Im sure

[MrMT]

Thanks bazaar, I'll take a look at that document in a minute but if it's pages and pages of legal speak, I'm liable to lose the plot very quickly

 

That's a very valid point, their letter states "Please find enclosed a copy of your latest executed agreement. This is a statement of the terms and conditions made since you entered into the agreement" But they didn't send it.

 

The letter they did send, if you can read the scan, is titled simply BARCLAYCARD CONDITIONS.

 

(Now I've read it) It's interesting to note Section 8 COULD THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT CHANGE:

8.1. We maychange the terms of this agreement and we will tell you about any changes that we make....

....

8.3. We will tell you about any changes by advertising them in the press, putting messages in your monthly statement or sending you a seperate written notice.

 

Hmm. :-|

 

Section 10 GENERAL:

...

10.5. We may transfer to any other person any or all of our rights and duties under this agreement at any time...

...We may do this without telling you...

...Your rights under this agreement and your legal rights (including those under the Consumer Credit Act 1974) will not be affected.

 

Anyway, getting back to the point, wasn't I also supposed to get at least a statement of account, if not all of them or am I thinking of a SAR? I told you get confused easily

 

But claiming this account goes back before '85 is total nonsense. Shouldn't the onus be on them to prove that too?

[the_shadow]

 

But claiming this account goes back before '85 is total nonsense. Shouldn't the onus be on them to prove that too?

 

 

I've no idea how accurate it is but on my equifax online credit check it shows the date the credit arrangement came into being, seems to be accurate for my mortgage and credit cards.

[MrMT]

What I meant was: I can assure you I have not entered into any agreement with Barclays before May 1985, not by a long chalk but how do I prove a negative? Surely they must provide the evidence that they're relying on not to send a true copy of my original executed agreement?

 

As for my credit file, I recently got a free 30-day trial (then spammed to death from all sorts of financial services!) and although there are (fairly recent) entries relating to Barclays, nothing about debts, loans, credit, payments or defaults etc. I'm not sure why Barclays is on my file other than it co-incides with when I moved home (notifying them).

[MrMT]

For some bedtime reading go to this link:

http://www.competition-commission.org.uk/rep_pub/reports/1980/fulltext/127c01.pdf

 

 

Yikes, I've only read to the end of the BARCLAYS page and it's quite an eye-opener. Seems they're able to bully and blame the government even though they admitted anti-competitive colaboration with ACCESS.

 

But what about my position, is the letter from Rory (above) adequate and accurate in this case? - doesn't seem to be many threads about this "strategy" to avoid duties under CCA.

[bazaar]

I would say that youd need sight of the signed document that this alleged agreement exists.

Youve asked for it specifically using the CPR requests, but the other side have yet to provide this.

Youve done all you can to try to resolve this out of the court room

But for some reason the other side are unwilling (Unable) to do this.

 

You would draft up directions to the honourable Judge that unless the produce the signed agreement, what case is there to answer??

[noomill060]

How old were you in May 1985?

 

No need to be specific, over 18 or under 18?

 

If you were under 18 at the time, its pretty easy to prove you didnt have a Bcard!

[MrMT]

Over 18 but certainly not a Barclays customer. But either way, surely the onus is not for me to prove a negative?

 

Without further advice I'm going to send rory's letter.

[darcus]

I was way under 18 at the May 1985 date they are specifying.

 

I don't really fancy going to court - what letter would I write - because they sent me the exact same stuff as MrMT

 

What happens now?

[rory32]

But either way, surely the onus is not for me to prove a negative?

The onus is always on the claimant to prove that the sum claimed exists and that they have any right to claim it as owing.

[rory32]

I was way under 18 at the May 1985 date they are specifying.

 

I don't really fancy going to court - what letter would I write - because they sent me the exact same stuff as MrMT

 

What happens now?

darcus you need to start your own thread on this to receive the appropriate help and advice. I assume you are in England but you need to clarify whether or not you are as the laws in England and Scotland are different regarding credit.

[MrMT]

If I'd scanned and posted the actual letter, someone less dim than me might have jumped on this one...

 

The letter is signed;

Persons Name

Court Orders and Disclosures

Legal and Regulatory Compliance

 

I could be in for a long fight, no?

[bazaar]

You could be MrMT

But its how you enjoy it that counts, That title at the bottom of their letter sounds really impressive, I bet the pimply little twerp who has that title feels real special.

Sometimes you'll get 'pre-litigation department' OOOOH scary. But probably the little pimply twerp sitting at a different desk that day

[rory32]

Court Orders and Disclosures

Legal and Regulatory Compliance

Or put another way - admin.

[MrMT]

I'm glad I got CAG on my side! It's raised my spirits seeing darcus' letter is the very same I'd recieved.

 

I've never had a problem with Barclays until RMA were set loose on me and even then held no grudge against Barclays, but this letter changes all that. Gloves are off.

 

I'd like to spend time learning the specific laws off by heart (because I am willing to go to court) but I'd really need it in a much condensed form - is there a "Law for Dummies" series anywhere?

[beachcomber60]

Subscribing

 

On the same collision course me thinks

[MrMT]

Yesterday, I sent the 'failure to satisfy CCA request' letter to Barclays concerning the lesser debt of the two.

 

This morning, I had a call from a new DCA called Apex Credit Management but refused to play their game and sent them packing. Later today, I get a letter from Apex regarding the higher amount debt - which RMA, Westminsters, SC Leatham have all threatened/demanded the full amount.

 

 

For this debt, I sent a CCA request to RMA before Christmas and haven't heard back yet. This is the first contact I've had regarding this debt (if I ignore all the telephone call attempts). What should I do? Nothing?

[bazaar]

You may wish to send them a bog off letter, something along the lines of.

Your clients are currently in default of a legal CCA request.

Please do not underestimate the seriousness of this, Now EFFF OFF

 

PS, Your doorstep caller may become rather wet, due to my obsession with watering my garden:D

[MrMT]

Oh how I would love to get a doorstep caller - whenever I'm verbally threatened with one, I ask them "please do" I'd love to have the opportunity to meet these cowards face to face!

 

But unfortunately, everything's gone rather quiet. I don't get phone calls anymore and the letters have stopped. I don't know if other forces (TS, OFT, FSA etc) are at play but it seems they are not so willing to put on paper any of what they say over the phone.

[MrMT]

Spoke too soon! I got a call from Calder yesterday and she was an ignorant cow. I told her she's not supposed to call and she insisted the "we can, we're allowed bit" so when I told her that I won't answer their security questions she said "Right, then we'll take action against you" and hung up! I went out later and returned to a silent answpherphone message from the same number. I don't know why, but that has got up my nose and I want to punish them for it.

 

Now here's a new one! I got a call today from a recording that began "Hi, have you got debts for more than once company.....blah blah blah, please press 6 to speak to a live operatore" so I did, intending to ask how they got my number but it went dead?!!! 1471 has no number so I can't call back to complain.

 

As well as calls to me, I'm also getting calls for previous tenannts and I'm mightily sick of them all now because I'm powerless to change that. What bothers me the most is when I'm working on something and have to put it all down to answer the phone. I'm really cheesed off.

[noomill060]

report to ofcom- silent calls be illegal.

 

Time to take action.