Taz11 v RBoS credit card debt

[davefirewalker]

Looks like youl have to go the SAR route or CPR 31.16

 

you NEED to see the ORIGINAL document with your signature on...if they havent got it they cant enforce it...ie cant get any money of you or take you to court.

 

Dave

[davefirewalker]

Hi fellas, and thanks, No, nothing with signature on whatsoever. Am I right in thinking, that if this was a "true copy" of my agreement, it should have least have the date it was taken out, a signature from either the creditor or debitor, and my original address when the agreement was taken out. This one says Parties are Royal Bank Of Scotland and Mr ********** of (my now present address).

 

Also it states, "at the date of this letter our current interest rates are....", which I presume are nothing like the % rates when it was "allegedly" taken out ??

 

thanks again for any advice

 

NO....

 

s3 of the consumer credit (cancellation notices and copies of documents....etc)1983 state that a true copy need not be a "photocopy", but should contain the "essence" of the agreement. Also it may omit some data...such as date and customers signature etc.

 

---------------------------

3 General requirements as to form and content of copy documents

(1) Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument

or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act

shall be a true copy thereof.

(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 cancellable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of the signature by the debtor of an

agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

 

© in the case of any copy of an unexecuted agreement delivered or sent to the debtor or hirer under section 62 of

the Act, the name and address of the debtor or hirer; and

[(d) in the case of any copy of an executed agreement given to the debtor under section 77(1) of the Act for fixed-

sum credit, or under section 78(1) for running-account credit, under which a person takes any articles in pawn, any

description of the article taken in pawn.]

 

 

My feeling on this is that it is wrong. They are misinterpreting s3 to there own ends.

 

the section in red if interpreted properly says that anything that is required by the act MUST be included apart from signature......UNLESS it is a cancellable agreement (as most are)

 

So it seems that they can leave very little out

 

However if they wont play ball,,,,,,try a CPR 31.16 aproach

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/173201-why-you-shouldnt-use.html

 

rgds

 

Dave

[davefirewalker]

Thanks Dave,

 

I've just read through your link, Scary stuff!!! for a newbie . In other words, put simply, they can pretty much leave off what they like until reaching court, where infact, if they have the "original document" they can produce it, and kick all the letters you sent to them into touch, and pretty much make the agreement enforceable.

We, as individuals, are just relying on the fact, that they don't have it, and calling their bluff till they can actually prove anything with an agreement in court.

 

Am I correct Dav in laymans terms.??

 

So the CPR 31.16 specifically asks for a SIGNED agreement, and shows us, if its available, what we have entered into. Without it, they don't have much chance.

 

thanks again

 

Taz11

 

Correct....got it in one

 

Dave

[davefirewalker]

Would I be right in thinking that if I Subject Access Request them, they HAVE to send a copy of my signed agreement??

 

 

 

NOT necessarily..............many have tried, and SOME have been suscessful.

 

if there are charges anyway, and i'm sure there must be ...A SAR would be the way to go anyway. ask Specifically for signed copies of any agreements.

 

failing that a cpr 31.16 request looks the only way forward.

 

Dont be too frightened, its shows that you are trying to resolve the dispute WITHOUT going to court.

 

A cpr 31.16 will not necessarily mean that you have to go to court, BUT if they dont supply it then you CAN make an application to the court to force them to supply the info.

 

rgds

 

Dave

[davefirewalker]

Thank you Dave,

 

 

 

Is there ANY law which states that a creditor is entitled to a copy of their true original signed agreement if requested, and that a creditor MUST send it, or is it the fact that they only HAVE to produce it in court.

Thanks again

Taz11

 

In the Civil Procedure rules there is a clause which states something like that where a case is brought because of a disputed document...the original copy must be available for inspection....or something like that...cant find the reference just yet.....

 

So......to take you to court they MUST have the original........OR a certified notarised TRUE COPY...ie a photocopy. if they need this and must have it to bring the case...then it stands to reason that to settle the case without the need for court action it would be reasonable if they supply it via a cpr 31.16 "request"...failing that you can apply to the court for 31.16 disclosure of documents....they CANNOT refuse that.

 

rgds

 

dave

[davefirewalker]

 

Have I got my head round that Dave??, Thanks for the patience m8 and explaining it perfectly. Lets hope they reply to my Subject Access Request saying they don't have it.......lol

 

thanks again

 

Taz11

 

You have understood well grasshopper......

 

Dave

[davefirewalker]

Hi Taz......

 

there are a number of scenarios and each requires a slightly different approach

 

1 they dont comply within 40 days......send the non compliance letter and a complaint to the Information commissioners office....

 

2 they only partially comply...ie some info but obviously some missing....sort of same as above.....but edit the letters to suit

 

3 doesnt look like youre getting anywhere fast....lots of runaround etc

go for the CPR approach.......

 

BE AWARE that the overiding objective is for the parties to settle their differences out of court, and that litigation should be seen as the last final step. The courts will not look favourably on anyone who seems to be rushing headlong into litigation without giving the other party a reasonable chance at negotiation/arbitration/settlement.

 

it takes time......sorry

 

 

rgds

 

Dave