attention all rbs/natwest breaches of 77/78 requests under the cca 1974

[2Grumpy]

How can we prove the reconstruction differs from the original if we don't have the original? Not being pessimistic - just want to find a way to catch the b*****s out. Imagine the impact our joint complaint would have with case after case of proven forgery:D

Perhaps some caggers do have genuine examples of original agreements from varying years they could post up?

 

Some are obviously not credit agreements but are the letters that you get with replacement credit card agreements attached. They are just sent out in an attempt to say that they have complied with the CCA request (apparently a blank piece of paper would comply so long as they say it is your credit agreement), so pay up.

 

They shoot themselves in the foot as they will have difficulty explaining why the Credit agreement they supplied is different to the real agreement if they manage to find it for the court case (they still need the original signed agreement if they take you to court)

 

Meanwhile they have asked for money based on an inaccurately reconstructed credit agreement - which just might be contrary to the fraud act 2006.

[underdog13]

They shoot themselves in the foot as they will have difficulty explaining why the Credit agreement they supplied is different to the real agreement if they manage to find it for the court case (they still need the original signed agreement if they take you to court)

 

Meanwhile they have asked for money based on an inaccurately reconstructed credit agreement - which just might be contrary to the fraud act 2006.

 

This ties in with what Paul was referring to earlier in the thread (no 11) about pji. I received my loan agreements from Natwest today - they all seem remarkabley pat, a bit too neatly done - and they all allow for pji. I will be trawling through my own archives this weekend to check this against the original carbon copies I kept.

 

Paul, if you don't mind me asking, were your loans over 4 or 5 years old?

[paulwlton]

They shoot themselves in the foot as they will have difficulty explaining why the Credit agreement they supplied is different to the real agreement if they manage to find it for the court case (they still need the original signed agreement if they take you to court)

 

If challenged (most consumers are ignorant of the law)

 

Meanwhile they have asked for money based on an inaccurately reconstructed credit agreement - which just might be contrary to the fraud act 2006.

Agreed. However, because the OFT are allowing banks to recreate from banking records, the bank will just claim they were mistaken negating the mens rea.

 

This ties in with what Paul was referring to earlier in the thread (no 11) about pji. I received my loan agreements from NatWest today - they all seem remarkabley pat, a bit too neatly done - and they all allow for pji. I will be trawling through my own archives this weekend to check this against the original carbon copies I kept.

 

Paul, if you don't mind me asking, were your loans over 4 or 5 years old?

 

In my case the agreement was taken out in 1998. However, RBSs senour management have stated that most pji clauses are contain in their secured loans.

[paulwlton]

They shoot themselves in the foot as they will have difficulty explaining why the Credit agreement they supplied is different to the real agreement if they manage to find it for the court case (they still need the original signed agreement if they take you to court)

 

Meanwhile they have asked for money based on an inaccurately reconstructed credit agreement - which just might be contrary to the fraud act 2006.

 

This ties in with what Paul was referring to earlier in the thread (no 11) about pji. I received my loan agreements from NatWest today - they all seem remarkabley pat, a bit too neatly done - and they all allow for pji. I will be trawling through my own archives this weekend to check this against the original carbon copies I kept.

 

Paul, if you don't mind me asking, were your loans over 4 or 5 years old?

 

Could you post your agreements?

[underdog13]

Thanks for replying Paul - I will post the agreements up when I've worked out how to do it; doh! I'm not great with technology - please bear with me:) My loans were unsecured and taken out in 2004, so the pji probably is right, but it won't hurt to check them against the carbon copies I kept; would have done this straight away, but things have been manic this week.

[oscar52]

I too have problems with Natwest / RBS group.

 

I have just been pointed across here from MSE / DFW boards.

 

I sent my letter to Natwest 26 September. The responded today (dated 31 OCt) so well outside the guidlines. I gave them a quick ring and was told that what they supplied was all they needed to.

 

I informed them I was well aware of their responsibilities as I worked for the largest credit card company in the country (which i do)

 

The response then was "you will have to write in" The only plus point in the call was that the person I spoke to agreed the "previous" T&Cs (which are rather generic and refer to numerous cards) were very difficult to read.

 

Second letter going in the post tomorrow!

[2Grumpy]

How can we prove the reconstruction differs from the original if we don't have the original? Not being pessimistic - just want to find a way to catch the b*****s out. Imagine the impact our joint complaint would have with case after case of proven forgery:D

Perhaps some caggers do have genuine examples of original agreements from varying years they could post up?

How about denying that you ever signed an agreement?

 

Most of the time they only got a signature on the application form

[underdog13]

I honestly don't recall ever signing an actual agreement; just an application form and then I received the card.

[2Grumpy]

I'm sure that's the case with most of my Credit cards

 

With NatWest; their first response to my CCA request was a copy of the application form. (part of the bank account application & definately unenforcable) that came with a compliments slip. I wrote back asking if that was their response to my CCA request & they sent a reconstructed agreement

 

Now why would they keep a copy of the application but not keep a copy of the actual agreement if they ever had an agreement?

[fedup74]

Me too I only asked for a CC and filled in the application and the card was sent. I never signed anything else.

[2Grumpy]

So if they come up with a "reconstructed" credit agreement, it would be materally different .. because anything is materially different to nothing.

 

So far NatWest aren't aware that there was no original agreement in my case, and have forgotten that they sent a copy of the application form, showing that they do keep stuff when they have them in the first place.

 

The application form was fairly unreadable, obviously from a microfiche and with a handwritten note on a compliments slip that "this was the best copy"!

[hellhasnofury]

Hello,

 

I would be extremely interested to hear from all caggers regarding their experiences of obtaining true copies of their credit agreements after sending a legal request under section 77/78 of the cca 1974 to the rbs/NatWest.

 

It is my experience that they are extremely reluctant or have mis-placed, lost, disposed of these legal agreements.

 

If enough evidence from customers is obtained, it is my intention to provide this evidence and submitted a mass complaint to the oft and the fsa, and hopefully, rather than tell us they will not investigate individual complaints, but pull their finger out and really investigate this matter and fine the pants of them:grin:

 

Thanks in anticipation:-D

 

Thanks for your input so far:grin:

 

Counting in the caggers so far

 

Me, for loans, credit card and naughty naughty no agreement for advantage gold account services. In fact they have never sent me any agreement whatsoever:rolleyes:

 

2Grumpy

underdog13

Paul Wilton ( and he knows of 5 more)

Fedup

Neilap

Oscar52

 

There must be hundreds more:grin:

[tinkerbell20]

So if they come up with a "reconstructed" credit agreement, it would be materally different .. because anything is materially different to nothing.

 

So far NatWest aren't aware that there was no original agreement in my case, and have forgotten that they sent a copy of the application form, showing that they do keep stuff when they have them in the first place.

 

The application form was fairly unreadable, obviously from a microfiche and with a handwritten note on a compliments slip that "this was the best copy"!

 

 

I would assume that the application form is probably the only document yopu actually signed in which case it is the agreement such as it is. Now the interesting part...... if the original application doesn't have the prescribed terms contained "within its 4 corners" BUT the reconstruction does then the reconstruction isn't a "true copy" & the Fraud Act 2006 can come into play..................

[Poppay2]

Hi

I too requested a cca a while ago from Incasso acting on behalf of RBS.

It took more than two months to arrive.

I do not know if it is the original.

However, the box with my signature and the date sometime in 1999, is on a page of its own.

There is also insurance added to the original loan I dont recall insurance payments but then that could be my failing memory.

Could this be a reconstructed cca?

I will post it up later once I work out how to.

I have erased any personal details ready for uploading.

I would be interested in your comments.

.....

[Poppay2]

This is first time uploading docs to this site, fingers crossed they uploaded ok.

 

I think the image file may be a bit on the small side will have to have another go later, lunch break is over.

 

....back to the drawing board......

Edited November 10, 2008 by POPPAY

[2Grumpy]

I would assume that the application form is probably the only document yopu actually signed in which case it is the agreement such as it is. Now the interesting part...... if the original application doesn't have the prescribed terms contained "within its 4 corners" BUT the reconstruction does then the reconstruction isn't a "true copy" & the Fraud Act 2006 can come into play..................

 

mmmmm.

 

Although I haven't reminded NatWest that I have given me a copy of the application & that there wasn't any other agreement, I have told NatWest that their reconstructed agreement differs materially from the original & that if they continue pressing for payment, I will be making a visit to the boys in blue. (Triton are doing their best at the moment with 2 unanswered calls & a couple of letters explaining that the account isn't in dispute because NW have sent their documents). Shame the balance they are chasing is wrong and NW won't write to me!

 

I must admit that I thought that whatever they sent was their "true copy", just because they sent it and confirmed that it was a "true copy", so a photocopy of a fag packet would have been their "true copy", it just wouldn't have been very enforcable! Time for a fresh approach maybe, but I didn't want NatWest to have another go at supplying an agreement when what they have sent is obviously not a credit agreement - it looks like a letter that would have had a new card attached - so it isn't very enforcable.

 

I have already told NatWest that they have confirmed that their reconstruction is their true copy & so if they attempt to rely on anything else as a credit agreement then they will have to explain to a judge any differences.

 

All I need now is for the muppets at NW to reply, rather than the muppets at Triton, even though they might be on adjacent desks.

[2Grumpy]

A further thought that I have already posted in another thread:

 

Where they have then reconstructed a "True Copy" that differs materially from the original (or there was no original) and said that you must pay based upon their production of that.

 

Since that reconstruction is not based on the original and it is incorrect, I have already suggested that what they are doing might be fraudulent.

 

But further, because it is the bank's policy to reconstruct the "True copy" and then demand payment when they can't find the original agreement (there is a copy of an in-house magazine boasting of this around here somewhere), this might constitute conspiracy to defraud, where the group who approved this policy plus any managers / directors who were aware of it (that would be lots of them) might be in the mire.

 

Grumpy

[hellhasnofury]

A further thought that I have already posted in another thread:

 

Where they have then reconstructed a "True Copy" that differs materially from the original (or there was no original) and said that you must pay based upon their production of that.

 

Since that reconstruction is not based on the original and it is incorrect, I have already suggested that what they are doing might be fraudulent.

 

But further, because it is the bank's policy to reconstruct the "True copy" and then demand payment when they can't find the original agreement (there is a copy of an in-house magazine boasting of this around here somewhere), this might constitute conspiracy to defraud, where the group who approved this policy plus any managers / directors who were aware of it (that would be lots of them) might be in the mire.

 

Grumpy

 

Wow Grumpy

 

What an excellent idea:D Need to get looking for the info:D all adds fuel to the fire.

 

Anybody any information relating to this:D

[fedup74]

No thoughts apart from- how very dare they!!! Shall be watching with interest as HFC done this to my OH- they admitted no agreement so took a "reconstructed" one to court- I have it in writing. So please if anyone does have any info re reconstructed agreements and the Fraud Act please post it up!!

[paulwlton]

This is what RBS are up to.

 

Regards

Paul

 

[Guest Menucha]

This is what RBS are up to.

 

Regards

Paul

 

positively disgraceful - can they not be reported for this - surely it's illegal!!!

[hellhasnofury]

Thanks Paul for this little snippet of vital information:D

 

:eek:

 

I am frankly shocked and almost speechless for once in my life:-x

 

More fuel to the fire:-x

 

Do you have a copy with the names not deleted??????

[paulwlton]

Thanks Paul for this little snippet of vital information:D

 

:eek:

 

I am frankly shocked and almost speechless for once in my life:-x

 

More fuel to the fire:-x

 

Do you have a copy with the names not deleted??????

 

Yes i do.

[fedup74]

The thing is though, who let them get away with re-creating agreements? Were these produced in a court of law or did the customer just give up and think they had to pay it? If they were produced in a court, shame on the judge.

[paulwlton]

The OFT claim that recreating agreements from banking records is acceptable under the Consumer Credit Act, as of yet i have been unable to locate the relevant section which allows this.