Just Recieved A Signed Capital One Agreement

[sunflower99]

Hi Desperate Daniella!and others interested in my thread!

I am very up and down.Some day i feel postitive and other times down .Ive been looking at that cca crap one sent me again and though i know they do and you know they do copy and past jobs and if it ever goes to court they will have troubles if they are trying to rely on copies but it is still worrying as ive now noticed that they make a feeble attempt to cover thenselves to explain the missing term 23!( I dont know( if you remember or looked at issues raised about my Crapitaol one CCA) but to recap one of the major flaws was that the front signed page read important plese read use of information overleaf (section 23 of the agreement) but when you look at page crapital one is trying to imply is overleaf there is no sign of clause 23 overleaf!but now i see crapital one makes a feeble attempt to explain it this as ive just noticed on top of second page crap one are trying to allude is on back ie overleaf!they have put in capital letters CREDIT AGREEMENT REGULATED BY THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 and in small letters they say These terms are taken from clause 8, 10,and 23 of the Terms and Conitions that you signn with us.so now i see they try to explain this absense of term 23 but i hope that this argument they present couold be blown if they try and argue this as term 23 is clearly not overleaf and is not anything to do with use of information and they are not able to include terms and conditions in a sepearate document or allude to certain terms and conditions on seperate papers which they are clearly doing to try and make a application form CCA enforceable??

[citizenB]

I think the above letter amended to suit would be a good one to send! and i like the extra issues it brings up such as incorrect headers and asking for arrnagement to be made to view the original!:Dand if they decline it will be another thing i can bring upm if they or another low life DCA attempts to taike any action against me!

 

The letter in post 90 looks pretty good to me. If they decline the request to view the document then I would be pretty certain in my own mind that they dont have anything other than that provided already.

 

I do understand the despair you feel at times..however, know that you can always log on to CAG for assistance and there will always be someone around to cheer you up.

 

From my own experience and hearing of the experience of others, complaining to the FOS might not always be a good idea. If I understand what the FOS are saying correctly, then unless you are going to lose out financially then they arent really interested and will find in favour of the banks. Even if the application form was written on kitchen roll and chewed by the dog.. the FOS will say that the bank has provided you withe the necessary response.

 

This leaves Trading Standards.. using the same format from RMW's thread "complaining to the FOS", you can make a complaint to TS. You do have to go via Consumer Direct first though.

 

Capital One are like MBNA, hard nuts to crack, they believe that UK consumer law doesnt apply to them, however, read round the threads.. most recently davey77's thread and you will find that eventually you can win.

 

In respect of the phone calls, is there any possibility you could get a letter from your husband's GP.. stating that the constant phone calls are stressing him to the detriment of his health. If so, I would do so. Alternatively, regardless of any inconvenience, I would be changing my telephone numbers.

 

Thank you for the click

[sunflower99]

The letter in post 90 looks pretty good to me. If they decline the request to view the document then I would be pretty certain in my own mind that they dont have anything other than that provided already.

 

I do understand the despair you feel at times..however, know that you can always log on to CAG for assistance and there will always be someone around to cheer you up.

 

From my own experience and hearing of the experience of others, complaining to the FOS might not always be a good idea. If I understand what the FOS are saying correctly, then unless you are going to lose out financially then they arent really interested and will find in favour of the banks. Even if the application form was written on kitchen roll and chewed by the dog.. the FOS will say that the bank has provided you withe the necessary response.

 

This leaves Trading Standards.. using the same format from RMW's thread "complaining to the FOS", you can make a complaint to TS. You do have to go via Consumer Direct first though.

 

Capital One are like MBNA, hard nuts to crack, they believe that UK consumer law doesnt apply to them, however, read round the threads.. most recently davey77's thread and you will find that eventually you can win.

 

In respect of the phone calls, is there any possibility you could get a letter from your husband's GP.. stating that the constant phone calls are stressing him to the detriment of his health. If so, I would do so. Alternatively, regardless of any inconvenience, I would be changing my telephone numbers.

 

Thank you for the click

Hi citasenB

Thanks for your response! However now ive been trawling through my Capital, one cca again as mentioned in my last post i am now confused and worried again:-om After going through it with all you folks when going through CCA and trying to pull it to pieces i was happy when the term 23 they refferred to on front signed page as being overleaf was missing from the second page which crapital one allege is on back of CCA .However i was worried today to disccover that there is a reference to term 23 as mentioned in my previous post as it says under the title CREDIT AGREEMENT REGULATED BY THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 These terms are taken from clauses8 10 and 23 of the terms and conditions that you sign with us.(on what crapital one alledge is on rear of application form).so now i am a bit worried as i was planning to make a main point of pointing to a defect in my crapital one cca saying that they refer to a term 23 which is completly absent overleaf ! but now i cant as they i have sort of mentioned it!:-oHowever it is misleading as the front application form says important please read use of information overleaf(setion 23 of the agreement )which sets out how your information will be used and the only ref to term 23 they make is to lump it in with terms 8 and 10 in a brief sntence saying they are incorporated into other terms mentioned on back including use of information.So now not sure what to do.as it does not list a proper term 23 as implied by front but they do mention it,.and now trying to imply that there are more pages that list terms properly but surely that is not a correct format to do this and that would be construed as another agreement and not enforceable even befre they get challenged to produce the original?sorry its a bit complicated here and hope i make sense!

Edited January 5, 2009 by sunflower99

[sunflower99]

sorry for another long rambling complicated post! It is so difficult trying to explain this rather complicated CCA!

[Desperate Daniella]

It's just midnight. I'm very muddled. I'll read it again in the morning.

 

I think what we must remember is that clearly all these B******s are going to go to any lengths to try to say that something was on the back when clearly it is very unlikely. It's a nightmare. We (the public) are getting on to them and saying we know they have dodgy agreements, and they are clearly going to try to get the money even if it means falsifying documents. I think I'm going to have to go for disclosures and personal inspections in some of my situations.

 

I am absolutely sure there will be some cases going to court soon where all these T*****s will be caught out.

 

DDxx

[sunflower99]

It's just midnight. I'm very muddled. I'll read it again in the morning.

 

I think what we must remember is that clearly all these B******s are going to go to any lengths to try to say that something was on the back when clearly it is very unlikely. It's a nightmare. We (the public) are getting on to them and saying we know they have dodgy agreements, and they are clearly going to try to get the money even if it means falsifying documents. I think I'm going to have to go for disclosures and personal inspections in some of my situations.

 

I am absolutely sure there will be some cases going to court soon where all these T*****s will be caught out.

 

DDxx

Hi Desperate Daniella!

Thanks for trying to read my muddled post! and trying to mals sense of it.I know i probably have explained things in a long winded way.!I am very worried though that the beggers are trying to imply i have conditions on the back and they are trying to make it worse by inserting a possibly false clause in front alledging i have something on back! a very low trick and now ive discovered they have made some ref to term23 on alleged back even if a rather vague one implying some conditions from term 23 are incorperated into aonther clause not labelled term 23 ! which is referring to use of information! rather begggers belief!:rolleyes:So now i am worried sick and dont know how to answer if they carry on pursuing me or takeing any other actions against me as they keep insisting this cca is enforceable as suppose they try to get this fudged up copy past a judge and say that it is unarguable that the cca is enforceable and insist that the clause in the front on my signed bit proves beyond all reasonable doubt that it is an enforceable CCA:eek:and they are therefore not forced to come up with original or question the validity of a microfilched one if there are only microfilched copies?.Although a lot of people on here have fudged up ccas copies probably falsy implying they had ts and cs on rear!not all are in the very unfortunate position as me of haveing the beggers ( i willl only use mild words here! as the obvious words that spring to mind would get me cagbooted !)of actually allegedly copying and pasting terms on a front of their CCA that falsy imply there are terms overleaf!:eek:so now Daniella i am having a very worrying tiome over this .I know i can can cpr13 them whether they take court action or not !for a cost of about £75 ive heard on other threads trouble is that if they dont come up with it or dont respond by admitting they dont have a true copy you have to follow it through and take them to court i beleive?if they have not taken me to court?sorry to write another book DD !.i just wish i could know how to word a letter to Crapital One challenging this isssue of term 23 which would be concise and make sense! or what to do next!Thanks for taking an interest in my thread and for your friendship and moral support! Sunflower xx:)

Edited January 6, 2009 by sunflower99

[citizenB]

Hiya Sunflower,

 

I dont think you are doing yourself any favours by worrying over this so much. I think if you carefully read back from the beginning of your thread you will see the following :

 

The information you typed out so carefully from the page that bears your signature is nothing more and nothing less than you signing to say that Cap1 can process your information.

 

Noomillo60 points out in post 22 that there are NO prescribed terms either on the signature page or within the terms and conditions they have supplied and has provided the relevant information should this be required. The prescribed terms MUST be within the 4 corners of the document either by reference to overleaf or on the signature page.

 

There is no link between the terms and conditions and the signature page. Just because Cap1 say they are part of the same document doesnt make it so without proof. If they are part of the same document then again WHERE are the prescribed terms ??.

 

The more you get involved in convulated letters back n forth to Cap1 the more confused you will become.

 

Is it your intention to complain to the FOS or Trading Standards. If so then do it now before you have to much more paperwork to copy and send to either of these:D

 

If you need to respond to Cap1, Debitas or any other DCA. YOU dont need to explain the discrepancies within the document, they know. They have a legal department to advise them. All you need to remember is that they will need to provide for a court (should it get that far) the original or a confirmed copy of an original document to proceed.

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi Sunflower,

 

Big hug, and sorry for not going online earlier in the day. I am so glad noomill has answered with some very good advice.

 

I know how you are feeling. You read the posts and realize that real people are challenging these companies and winning and we are encouraged, and then at three a.m. you are awake and wondering how you can ever have the nerve to take these people on. It is so frightening. (I

[Desperate Daniella]

Sorry, hit the wrong button before end of my post.

 

What I think I understand from your post is that Capone are trying to say that "there is a Clause 23 overleaf, but even if there isn't a Clause 23 overleaf Clause 13 says what would have been said in Clause 23"? Well, if the front page refers to 'Clause 23 overleaf', then Clause 23 has to be overleaf. If they are now trying to say that 13 says what 23 would have said, they clearly know that really isn't relevant.

 

I am still waiting for the bodge job from them. I am so shocked that these companies would get up to this sort of thing. Call me naive ......

 

Daniella

[Desperate Daniella]

Sorry, didn't mean noomill, meant Citizen B!!! Sorry CB

 

DD

[sunflower99]

Hiya Sunflower,

 

I dont think you are doing yourself any favours by worrying over this so much. I think if you carefully read back from the beginning of your thread you will see the following :

 

The information you typed out so carefully from the page that bears your signature is nothing more and nothing less than you signing to say that Cap1 can process your information.

 

Noomillo60 points out in post 22 that there are NO prescribed terms either on the signature page or within the terms and conditions they have supplied and has provided the relevant information should this be required. The prescribed terms MUST be within the 4 corners of the document either by reference to overleaf or on the signature page.

 

There is no link between the terms and conditions and the signature page. Just because Cap1 say they are part of the same document doesnt make it so without proof. If they are part of the same document then again WHERE are the prescribed terms ??.

 

The more you get involved in convulated letters back n forth to Cap1 the more confused you will become.

 

Is it your intention to complain to the FOS or Trading Standards. If so then do it now before you have to much more paperwork to copy and send to either of these:D

 

If you need to respond to Cap1, Debitas or any other DCA. YOU dont need to explain the discrepancies within the document, they know. They have a legal department to advise them. All you need to remember is that they will need to provide for a court (should it get that far) the original or a confirmed copy of an original document to proceed.

Hi Citizen B Thanks for your reassurance about my dodgy Crap One CCA! I am sorrry but as youve guessed i do tend to be a bit of a worrier:)and thanks for bearing with me and giving me some much needed reassurance and moral support so i dont feel so alone!Everyone on this thread has been brilliant in their advice reassurnace and moral support and i want to say a special thankyou to you and Desperate Daniele for helping get me through the new year blues!and giving me fresh reassurance for this rather badly hated time of the year by me!As you and Noomill pointed out even the trems and conditions are not in all legally prescribed form for the consumer credit act and now ive had a chance to learn more thorougly the terms of the consumer crdeit act about what makes a correctly executed enforceable agreement and studied my crap one CCA i notice that that table of percentages for various amounts borrowed in what they alledge is on rear of cca still do not conform properly to the prescribed terms on how a debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments as no where does it say about the number of repayments amount of repayments frequency of reapyments or dates and as i undersand it they have to express these factors clearly in laymans terms and not just rely on a complicated table of percentages which makes how you repay a sum of say a £2000 as clear as mud going by Crap Ones percentage table to an orinary person like me who is not a maths genious! and i expect judges in courts are fully aware of the fact in the 21st century that all organisations and people have easy acess to paste and copy software!:-DThanks cit B for your help and moral support! I will try and chill out more !

[sunflower99]

Hi Sunflower,

 

Big hug, and sorry for not going online earlier in the day. I am so glad noomill has answered with some very good advice.

 

I know how you are feeling. You read the posts and realize that real people are challenging these companies and winning and we are encouraged, and then at three a.m. you are awake and wondering how you can ever have the nerve to take these people on. It is so frightening. (I

Hi Desperate Danielle

A big hug for you too! and thanks for being there for me! I have to dash now to get to work but at least i will have an easier less worry free day thanks to you and CB! A big hug to you both! Sunflower xx:)

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi Sunflower,

 

Glad you are feeling a bit better.

 

Just one more thing to throw in here. I have just been going through all my statements. Up till June 2005 all they had on the back were details of how to pay, customer services and a few bits on interest, etc., nothing like any prescribed terms. Then in July 2005 they changed the back to include a summary box which has a few terms mentioned but also says it is not intended to replace any T&Cs. Under 'Fees' it says 'See your credit card agreement'. Clearly it was at this time that they realized they needed to do something to comply with prescribed terms in some odd form other. Other cards were doing summaries on the back of their statements well before that.

 

DD

[Desperate Daniella]

The post has just arrived.

 

Can you believe this? Capone have just sent me exactly the same thing as they sent before Christmas. No letter, just a comp slip, and with it is a badly copied sheet of A4

 

At the top right Capital One - no address.

 

top left

 

Application form

 

my name and address.

 

 

Halfway down, just the signature box for the application. No prescribed terms here.

 

It does refer to Section 23 overleaf - Use of Information, and also says 'I have read the Terms and Conditions setting out the Agreement with Capital One....." (nothing about overleaf).

 

This is like my Amex agreement - it is internally inconsistent. Why do they refer to one thing being overleaf but not the other. I am becoming more and more convinced the prescribed terms can't have been on the back.

 

I also think they must be wise by now to the fact that people are on to them about their cut and paste activities. This is the third time they have sent me 'something' (first time was just current T&Cs) then this exact photocopy twice, and no-one wants to put their name to it.

 

Cutting and pasting T&Cs and implying they were on the back of a document when they weren't is falsifying that document, and is a very serious offence.

 

No doubt the phones will start ringing from Debitas again, and I will have to give another tutorial about the CCA 74 starting from the position that they have to spell their name and then admit they don't know what I am talking about.

 

DD

[cashins]

I also think they must be wise by now to the fact that people are on to them about their cut and paste activities. This is the third time they have sent me 'something' (first time was just current T&Cs) then this exact photocopy twice, and no-one wants to put their name to it.

 

 

With the state of Cap 1 agreements, that's about all you will get from them.

 

I have yet to hear of Cap 1 coming up with a CCA fro before 2005 or so, that would stand up in court. Doesn't mean to say there arn't any but the must be thin on the ground.

 

David

[Desperate Daniella]

As expected, got a call from Debitas this afternoon, two days after they posted what they are trying to say is an agreement (and they posted it second class!!). Refused to go through security, said they were in default as I had repeatedly told them and the people at Capital One, and was she familiar with CCA 1974? "No." "Well," I said, "if you want to call again perhaps you could make sure the call comes from someone who is." End of call.

 

I started with Capone in 2003, and if they have actually got a copy of anything else on this application form they clearly don't want me to see it. As they have just supplied the signature box for the application form twice now it'll be quite a question to ask if they suddenly come up with what was supposed to be above it, on the back and so on.

 

DD

[cashins]

Got an odd letter from Cap 1 today:

 

"I am writing to advise you that Capital One are dealing with your account.

 

It is important that you continue making payments to your account. Payments should be made directly to Capital One unless otherwise notified.

 

You have two payment options for clearing this debt. It is important that you take one of these steps today."

 

etc, etc.

 

Reminds me of the sort of thing you get when you set a young child a composition. ie:

 

I went to the park today. It was cold in the park. In the park there is a lake......

 

Not exactly joined up writing.

 

I don't get the plot either, as the account has been with them for seven years and I haven't paid a bean in ten months.

 

Don't think they rate a gold star.

 

David

[sunflower99]

The post has just arrived.

 

Can you believe this? Capone have just sent me exactly the same thing as they sent before Christmas. No letter, just a comp slip, and with it is a badly copied sheet of A4

 

At the top right Capital One - no address.

 

top left

 

Application form

 

my name and address.

 

 

Halfway down, just the signature box for the application. No prescribed terms here.

 

It does refer to Section 23 overleaf - Use of Information, and also says 'I have read the Terms and Conditions setting out the Agreement with Capital One....." (nothing about overleaf).

 

This is like my Amex agreement - it is internally inconsistent. Why do they refer to one thing being overleaf but not the other. I am becoming more and more convinced the prescribed terms can't have been on the back.

 

I also think they must be wise by now to the fact that people are on to them about their cut and paste activities. This is the third time they have sent me 'something' (first time was just current T&Cs) then this exact photocopy twice, and no-one wants to put their name to it.

 

Cutting and pasting T&Cs and implying they were on the back of a document when they weren't is falsifying that document, and is a very serious offence.

 

No doubt the phones will start ringing from Debitas again, and I will have to give another tutorial about the CCA 74 starting from the position that they have to spell their name and then admit they don't know what I am talking about.

 

DD

Hi Desperate Daniella

Thanks again for all your moral support and helping to set my worrries at rest! It is awful when companies try and mess around CCAS like this,and im sure one of these days one they will get their come uppance!i suppose even if one of the DCAS takes it as far as court trying to frighten a person into making paynents to them i suspect the usual result is if the debter stands up to them and demands they bring original to court the DCA backs down knowing they have got dodgy paperwork and no enforceable CCAi and i suspect a lot of cases are as a result just put aside.by the judge! i just hope the victims dragged into court by these low life DCAs demand loads of court costs from them!:Dso i suppose a lot of dodgy CCA cases dont go to court in the end!Whats with this term 23 They seeem to love so much!:confused:and they insist on referring to in all their blue peter jobs!Beachcomber has an identical CCA to me even down to the probable fake foldl ines.I know that there is something strange going on as Zazen warrior has an identical application to me and Beachcomber with same logos etc but words in center of hers have different word and does not refer to this mysterious term 23!

[sunflower99]

Got an odd letter from Cap 1 today:

 

"I am writing to advise you that Capital One are dealing with your account.

 

It is important that you continue making payments to your account. Payments should be made directly to Capital One unless otherwise notified.

 

You have two payment options for clearing this debt. It is important that you take one of these steps today."

 

etc, etc.

 

Reminds me of the sort of thing you get when you set a young child a composition. ie:

 

I went to the park today. It was cold in the park. In the park there is a lake......

 

Not exactly joined up writing.

 

I don't get the plot either, as the account has been with them for seven years and I haven't paid a bean in ten months.

 

Don't think they rate a gold star.

 

David

Hi David

so you in the crapital one fan club too!and have loads of friendly phone calls! They are a serious contender against MBNA for harressing phone calls!

[sunflower99]

I managed to score a hat trick yesterday and got a third Debitarse DCA to put phone down on me.!He was quite aggresssvie when i kept saying communication in writing ! and said i had to speak to him!What a cheek!I said no i dont! and said communication in writing again!:DI felt i had gone back to schooldays when you have rows in the playground!.He sounded like he was going to throw his rattle out of his pram,! I just kept repaeating myself like a parrot and he eventually slammed phone down! id better watch myself im starting to enjoy these phone calls!Ive never had so many men wanting to speak to me on the phone!LOL:D

[cashins]

He sounded like he was going to throw his rattle out of his pram,! I just kept repaeating myself like a parrot and he eventually slammed phone down! id better watch myself im starting to enjoy these phone calls!

 

Don't you just love it.

 

Can I suggest you add to the fun by introducing a low 'chuckle' when they start getting uppity. As they get more irate this should develope through giggles into a full blown laugh. The results are worth the effort!!

 

David

[sunflower99]

I just wanted to ask about another aspect of my crapital One CCA!I have seen on some threads that these credit cards CCA can be picked up on incorrect headings as another reason to complain about CCA not being properly executed as schedule 1 of the consumer Credit Agreements (Agreeements) Regulations Regulations 1983 states that sll documents conforming to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 should have a Heading in the prescribed form giving the nature of the agreement and if it is a credit card account it should read CREDIT CARD AGREEEMENT REGULATED BY THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 on the relevant parts of the agreemnt and shuld not read just CREDIT AGREEMENT .on a credit card agreement they should not omit the word Card! Now on the above cca they say Credit agreement regulated by ithe consumer credit Act 1974 just above the appication terms which would normally be another error whic could be pointed out in thie application form being alleged as a CCA! as it should read Credit Card Agreement Regulated by the consumer credit act 1974!but they try to cover this by inserting just above this incorrect heading! just the words Credit card Agreement! Does this mean that their appication form they alledge doubles up as a cca! can be pulled up on another error of incorrect heading that does not conforn to regulations or does the fact that the words credit card Agreement inserted above this heading make the heading correct?Although i know this cca unenforceable for all the other reasons you all pointed out in thread! I am just trying to find as many extra things wong with this cca that i can!:DThe second page Crapital One implys is on back of cca definitly has an incorrect title as it refers to Credit Agreement regulated by consumer credit act 1974 so that is something that they can be puleed up on but was not sure about the front?

[The GodMother]

I managed to score a hat trick yesterday and got a third Debitarse DCA to put phone down on me.!He was quite aggresssvie when i kept saying communication in writing ! and said i had to speak to him!What a cheek!I said no i dont! and said communication in writing again!:DI felt i had gone back to schooldays when you have rows in the playground!.He sounded like he was going to throw his rattle out of his pram,! I just kept repaeating myself like a parrot and he eventually slammed phone down! id better watch myself im starting to enjoy these phone calls!Ive never had so many men wanting to speak to me on the phone!LOL:D

 

 

Next ime i would say.

 

Everything in writing please the go are u deaf i said everything in writing then repeat that.

[sunflower99]

Don't you just love it.

 

Can I suggest you add to the fun by introducing a low 'chuckle' when they start getting uppity. As they get more irate this should develope through giggles into a full blown laugh. The results are worth the effort!!

 

David

Hi David!

That sounds a good idea! i must try that sometime!Dont you just love to make them mad! :DLOL I thought about trying the deaf old lady routine next time!say to him sorry i cant hear you dearie! i must turn my hearing aid up! LOL and keep saying pardon!See how long he stays patient!

[sunflower99]

Next ime i would say.

 

Everything in writing please the go are u deaf i said everything in writing then repeat that.

Hi godmother !

Thats a good one too! Ask them if they deaf!i love that!