Just Recieved A Signed Capital One Agreement

[sunflower99]

Hi sunflower, I forgot to add that I got a reply to the letter i sent in post 312 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/172543-just-recieved-signed-capital-16.html#post1953904

 

They completely ignored the question of whether the cca was a cut and shut and stated that they have supplied a cca and they will no longer correspond.

Hi Version!

Well thats crapital one for you!Dosent loook like you will be getting that day out in suny Nottingham to view your agreement then!:DThey seem to always convienently ignore the point of asking to view CCA or asking for confirmation that what they imply is overleaf is actually overleaf dosent look like you will have much luck either if you think about going down CPR31.16 going by theri response to other peoples experiences!They seem strangely reluctant to confirm those pages are in original form and part of same document!They just press button A or B on their letter template machine!

Edited March 7, 2009 by sunflower99

[sunflower99]

are either of you paying them anything, perhaps the minimum amount, or nothing at all, hoping that the CCA will be unenforceble ? (Like me)..

Hi Hopster!

I stopped paying them completly when they failed to respond to my hardship letter asking them to consider allowing me to make token payments and freeze interest and charges for a while! and sent me their bog paper response to CCA request!

[the_shadow]

Hi PMW

Crap ones usual drivel! They dont seem to have the slightest clue about the law!still it would have been worse if they had come up with one! At least i think you can safely assume they have got a dodgy one as if they had one why dont they comply with your legal request and send it to you or arrange for you to view it so that the matter would be sorted ! sounds like they not got one! Are you going to write back and say that to them!

 

Not sure at present to be honest sunflower, if thats her final response then I might be able to go straight to issuing N244, I think I have grounds but I'm going to post details in the why you shouldnt..... etc thread for clarification.... plus I'll need to raise the £75:eek: needed.

[The GodMother]

Yes according to pts thread you do have grounds for the N244. Also if u are low income u may be able to have a fee exemption.

[lexis200]

Evening all:)

 

I've just had one back after a chat with a very pleasant chap at Cap1 last week (it's on my thread if you're interested). I haven't posted it up yet, but I've had the same as you lot:) On mine though, there are two very definite fold lines where it would have been sent back to them - the back however is pristine, and looks to be a different font.

 

Mine has the reference to section/clause (whatever it is) 23 too, but I thought that may have meant a clause on the actual terms. Not that I can check this as they still haven't sent the historics.

 

Is the general consensus that it's a Blue Peter job? I'm going to do the same and ask them outright if it's one document and see what template I get back.

 

I am wondering though, if we have all asked this directly, and we're all being ignored, would it be possible for us all to complain to, say, the ICO and make it a mass thing? Perhaps if rather than just one of us saying there's an issue with Cap1, there are 20 or 30 all with exactly the same problem, it won't be so easily brushed aside.

 

Added to that, if it does turn out they've been a little bit naughty with the agreements, one could be a slip up, but dozens?

 

Lexis:)

[Fangio of the nineties]

Lexis, i think thats a cracking idea.. can you count me in ? just let me know whats required.. I think there's probably some more suport from others on my thread too..

 

i'll post a link..if thats ok..

 

We may also consider pressing their local MP... from what i can see there seems to be a recognition that CC debt is an issue that must be dealt with... hence the ministry of justice liscensing all these "debt counsellors" that have sprung up on the back of what CAG has been doing for free..

 

Also of course... banks behaving badly are an easy target right now.. and no doubt likley to be the subject of further regulation..which basically means more jobs for constituents in Nottingham to ensure they comply..

 

worth a thought..

 

FOTN

 

FOTN

[traceyb918]

Count me in Lexis x

[the_shadow]

Yes according to pts thread you do have grounds for the N244. Also if u are low income u may be able to have a fee exemption.

 

I'm not on a low income just high bills:D:D

 

PmW

[the_shadow]

Evening all:)

 

I am wondering though, if we have all asked this directly, and we're all being ignored, would it be possible for us all to complain to, say, the ICO and make it a mass thing? Perhaps if rather than just one of us saying there's an issue with Cap1, there are 20 or 30 all with exactly the same problem, it won't be so easily brushed aside.

 

Added to that, if it does turn out they've been a little bit naughty with the agreements, one could be a slip up, but dozens?

 

Lexis:)

 

I'm game

[sosumi]

Me too.

[beachcomber60]

Me three

[citizenB]

I think there are a few of us that would be interested in this, Lexis.

Didnt Reallymadwoman organise something similar for another CC company ?

[GamekeeperToPoacher]

I have just CCA'd Crap1 and look forward to the scrap and would like to join.

Currently I am on benefits and so can put in all the N forms etc for free AND I walk past their head office on a fortnightly basis.

 

Interestingly I have started receiving telephone calls and I upset the 'lady' last night as I refused to go through the ID procedure despite her telling me she had some time sensitive information. I am curious as to what it was. 12+ 1 to go.

 

Ho hum

 

GK

[citizenB]

I have just CCA'd Crap1 and look forward to the scrap and would like to join.

Currently I am on benefits and so can put in all the N forms etc for free AND I walk past their head office on a fortnightly basis.

 

Interestingly I have started receiving telephone calls and I upset the 'lady' last night as I refused to go through the ID procedure despite her telling me she had some time sensitive information. I am curious as to what it was. 12+ 1 to go.

 

Ho hum

 

GK

 

This is usually a one side deal ie.. they will accept a reduced amount in F&F settlement. They will mark your credit reference file partially settled. They will then either make a deal to collect the rest from you over a period of time or sell the balance on. Do not be fooled into thinking that by accepting their deal (unless properly documented and signed) is actually the full and final settlement they are advising.

 

The time sensitive element means they are possibly thinking of passing your account onwards to either their inhouse collection agents Debitas or to an outside DCA.

[lexis200]

I think there are a few of us that would be interested in this, Lexis.

Didnt Reallymadwoman organise something similar for another CC company ?

 

Not sure CB but I think I'll pm her and have a word.

 

My thinking on my own personal one at the moment is to ask them directly whether it was one document or two. I'm going to try and format a letter this weekend doing that. That gives a way forward whatever they answer. If they try and avoid the issue, you can show they're being obstructive. If they flat out say it's a true document, you can make a request to see it. When they ignore/don't let you, you can again show they're being obstructive. If they say 'oops, our mistake, it is two different docs', then it's a nice easy complaint about attempting to mislead.

 

If everyone did this and got up to the point where they have received a reply one way or another, then we can take it further, showing x amount of people have gone down this route and all have been misled/ignored etc.

 

What do you all think of that as a starting point?

 

I know it's going to take time to do it, but obviously we have to have some sort of similar experience in order to make a valid complaint, otherwise it won't stand up and it can be brushed aside.

 

I must point out when I posited the idea it was just that - asking whether it would be possible or not. I'm quite happy to carry on with it and find out what we need, but if anyone has other ideas please say, because anything I do would only be based on my personal thoughts otherwise!

 

If I can get a little letter done this weekend and anyone fancies using it to see what responses we get, just let me know.

 

Lexis:)

[citizenB]

Not sure CB but I think I'll pm her and have a word.

 

My thinking on my own personal one at the moment is to ask them directly whether it was one document or two. I'm going to try and format a letter this weekend doing that. That gives a way forward whatever they answer. If they try and avoid the issue, you can show they're being obstructive. If they flat out say it's a true document, you can make a request to see it. When they ignore/don't let you, you can again show they're being obstructive. If they say 'oops, our mistake, it is two different docs', then it's a nice easy complaint about attempting to mislead.

 

If everyone did this and got up to the point where they have received a reply one way or another, then we can take it further, showing x amount of people have gone down this route and all have been misled/ignored etc.

 

What do you all think of that as a starting point?

 

I know it's going to take time to do it, but obviously we have to have some sort of similar experience in order to make a valid complaint, otherwise it won't stand up and it can be brushed aside.

 

I must point out when I posited the idea it was just that - asking whether it would be possible or not. I'm quite happy to carry on with it and find out what we need, but if anyone has other ideas please say, because anything I do would only be based on my personal thoughts otherwise!

 

If I can get a little letter done this weekend and anyone fancies using it to see what responses we get, just let me know.

 

Lexis:)

 

I think this is a briliant idea.. yes please, I would love to have a copy of your letter x

[sosumi]

I don't know if it has been mentioned here before, but found this looking for Capital One news earlier:

In Christine's own words

[keefyboy]

Well sunflower you have done well to get that from them, all I have is a letter from them saying the terms and conditions are overleaf, but reading a couple of bit above they have not supplied me with the required

 

This what noonmill posted

 

In order for an agreement to be enforceable, there only need to be four pieces of information, called prescribed terms.

 

1. Number of repayments;

 

2. Amount of repayments;

 

3. Frequency and timing of repayments;

 

4. Dates of repayments;

 

5. The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

 

and the smile has just comeback onto my face...... there is not anything like this on there, I will recheck but all the info on the Terms of Agreement were in 2/3 rds of an A4 page...

 

 

 

If it doesnt have these, its only use is as a paper dart.

[sunflower99]

Evening all:)

 

I've just had one back after a chat with a very pleasant chap at Cap1 last week (it's on my thread if you're interested). I haven't posted it up yet, but I've had the same as you lot:) On mine though, there are two very definite fold lines where it would have been sent back to them - the back however is pristine, and looks to be a different font.

 

Mine has the reference to section/clause (whatever it is) 23 too, but I thought that may have meant a clause on the actual terms. Not that I can check this as they still haven't sent the historics.

 

Is the general consensus that it's a Blue Peter job? I'm going to do the same and ask them outright if it's one document and see what template I get back.

 

I am wondering though, if we have all asked this directly, and we're all being ignored, would it be possible for us all to complain to, say, the ICO and make it a mass thing? Perhaps if rather than just one of us saying there's an issue with Cap1, there are 20 or 30 all with exactly the same problem, it won't be so easily brushed aside.

 

Added to that, if it does turn out they've been a little bit naughty with the agreements, one could be a slip up, but dozens?

 

Lexis:)

Hi Lexis!

I am thinking about sending a letter to crapital one asking this as well!! I have already sent MBNA a lettter asking this last week but have not yet heard a reply!

[sunflower99]

I don't know if it has been mentioned here before, but found this looking for Capital One news earlier:

In Christine's own words

Hi Sosumi

What an awful story.Its unbelievable how awful they were with that poor woman and all over such a petty sum.

[sunflower99]

Evening all:)

 

I've just had one back after a chat with a very pleasant chap at Cap1 last week (it's on my thread if you're interested). I haven't posted it up yet, but I've had the same as you lot:) On mine though, there are two very definite fold lines where it would have been sent back to them - the back however is pristine, and looks to be a different font.

 

Mine has the reference to section/clause (whatever it is) 23 too, but I thought that may have meant a clause on the actual terms. Not that I can check this as they still haven't sent the historics.

 

Is the general consensus that it's a Blue Peter job? I'm going to do the same and ask them outright if it's one document and see what template I get back.

 

I am wondering though, if we have all asked this directly, and we're all being ignored, would it be possible for us all to complain to, say, the ICO and make it a mass thing? Perhaps if rather than just one of us saying there's an issue with Cap1, there are 20 or 30 all with exactly the same problem, it won't be so easily brushed aside.

 

Added to that, if it does turn out they've been a little bit naughty with the agreements, one could be a slip up, but dozens?

 

Lexis:)

I would be interested in doing this too!Must get to work on finishing that letter too! So i can send one to crap one too!

[sunflower99]

Well sunflower you have done well to get that from them, all I have is a letter from them saying the terms and conditions are overleaf, but reading a couple of bit above they have not supplied me with the required

 

This what noonmill posted

 

In order for an agreement to be enforceable, there only need to be four pieces of information, called prescribed terms.

 

1. Number of repayments;

 

2. Amount of repayments;

 

3. Frequency and timing of repayments;

 

4. Dates of repayments;

 

5. The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

 

and the smile has just comeback onto my face...... there is not anything like this on there, I will recheck but all the info on the Terms of Agreement were in 2/3 rds of an A4 page...

 

 

 

If it doesnt have these, its only use is as a paper dart.

so sent you their usual bog paper!

[sunflower99]

Jan 09

Account In Dispute

Account No

Dear Sir/Madam

i am in receipt of your letter of the ------.I am writing to you to state that unfortunatly the documents you enclosed with letter dated --- December still has not produced any evidence that the Agreement is enforceable for the following reasons.

1.One of the documents you sent is an application form.Neither of the documents carry the correct title in the prescribed form giving the nature of the agreement as laid down by schedule 1 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) regulations 1983.if they are considered to be be suitable as becoming Agreements once properly executed.The missing title being- Credit Card Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

2.Agreements must contain the prescribed terms within the four corners and furthermore no where on the front is there any reference to the prescribed terms and conditions which are necessary to make this agreement enforceable.

3.There is not proof that the second page is from the same agreement .An agreement that is not properly executed and was signed before 2007 is not enforceable unless it has the debtors signature and the prescribed terms in the same document.Nowhere within regulations does it state that part of the agreement can be presented on a separate document headed terms and conditionsThe prescribed terms must be within the four corners of the agreement and as you will be aware there is a House of Lords' authority on this: Lord Justice Tuckey in the case of Wilson v Hurstanger 2007 EWCA civ 299.

.The courts powers to enforce an agreement that is not properly executed and that was entered into before 2007 are limited by section 127(3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.This section says that an agreement that is not properly executed can only be enforced if it consists of a single document .

a) signed by the debtor, and

b)has the prescribed terms

You are reminded that should you choose litigation as your course of action ,you will be required to provide the original dodcument for the Court.

 

 

You should be aware that a creditor is not permitted to take ANY action against an account whilst it remains in dispute. The lack of a compliant credit agreement is a very clear dispute and as such the following applies:

You may not demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you.

You may not add further interest or charges to the account.

You may not pass the account to a third party.

You may not register any information in respect of the account with any Credit Reference Agency.

You may not issue a default notice in respect of the account.

 

If however you do still retain a copy of the original signed Agreement with all of the prescribed terms as laid down in the regulations, then I request to be allowed to view this at your offices.

So in reference to this copy of the credit agreement in which you claim it is compliant under section 78 of the consumer credit act 1974. (As I am sure you are aware, your statement is now binding under the same act-) I have concerns as to the authenticity in relation of the document which was sent with your letter dated xx Jan 2009

One of my main concerns is specifically related to the front and back parts of the agreement in question. Whilst I do not disagree these two parts may exist as seperate documents my concern is that the front part of the agreement refers to a section of the back that does not exist. It is therefore reasonable under these circumstances to assume that both the pages(both front and the second page sent with it ) which you sent in response to my s78 request agreement are in fact two seperate documents photocopied onto two sheets of paper.

As the document supplied by Capital One is an important legal document I would be grateful if you could confirm that the two pages are from the same document and reflects the original exactly on both sides or two separate documents photocopied onto two sheet of paper,?ie that the second paper you sent with the front signed page is actually on same page overleaf of the front signed paper you sent?

However if you still maintain that the second page with terms and conditions is indeed on back of that signed application form so they are both on same page and that you still believe you have a correctly executed enforceable agreementI think the best way way forward to resolve this matter to both our satisfaction would be for you to contact me to arrange a convienent time for me to come over to your office to view the original agreement. i would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

yours Faithfully

 

[sunflower99]

Hi folks!

I am thinking of sending this letter in above post to crapital one.It is a hybrid between versions letter and other letter templates ive seen plus a few of my own words!I would be grateful for anybodys input of how it could be improved or if it is ok to send it like this .Any comments ideas or suggestions on how to improve it or whether you think it ok to send would be greatly appreciated!

[version302003]

Hi sunflower, i know ive already asked them but im gonna send that off aswell. Lets see if we get a reply