Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • £3000* as your contribution (Excess) to the sum insured.   If you are on fully comp. you’ll get your repairs, their repairs (and costs) and have to contribute £3k*.   If you are on 3rd party (fire & theft) you’ll get their repairs (and costs) and have to contribute (£3k* AND all of your repair costs), [unless you don’t want your car repaired when you’ll just pay the £3k*]   * £3k if the total exceeds £3k, the total value of the claim if the claim doesn’t exceed £3k : why it  is important to find out the value of their claim and if their claim is appropriate or inflated.
    • I think you're conflating the discussion with your own view of what open borders means.  Obviously I don't think it's sensible to allow people to come to the country and claim whatever they can - They can't even do that now.  If they have a job, and are able to support themselves then that is what I would say is fair enough.  The real issue with selecting who comes to the country is that you can't devise a system that selects people fairly, and it would need some human intervention down the line.  How do you decide who is of benefit to the country etc.. I think if we go down that route, that is where I feel uncomfortable.  Even if we adopted an Australian points based system it wouldn't reduce immigration, and the hole notion of only allowing people that earn above a certain sum of money to come to the country is plain silly - As if the amount of money someone earns is the mark of their character.  And as we know, we rely heavily on low skilled seasonal labour.     Your point is moot because our low skilled workforce have no reason to move to another country unless the standard of living is equal or better to ours.  I did read the other day though that the UK provides the greatest number of immigrants from any other country to Australia.   I would suggest that the foreign aid everyone likes to grumble at is a way to improve living standards in other countries.
    • I dont care what race, colour, creed, sexuality or personal religious beliefs anyone holds and just like I dont believe anyone should be penalised in any way for their purely personal choices and beliefs, neither do I believe they should expect or be given benefit or preference over any others based on them.   Real non-discrimination in my opinion.   If a person is a benefit to our society - I don't care about their purely personal choices. If a person is not a benefit to our society - I dont care about their purely personal choices.   ... and that certainly is not anything approaching Nazi-ism in my opinion. Sounds more like real world socialism to me than most self-proclaiming socialists I hear and see.     Are people who make 'profit' - all 'bad' - are they heck as like Are people who say we should give everything away to those more 'needy' - all 'good' - are they heck as like and in the vast majority of those cases most are nether of the extremes of 'good' or 'bad',   .. although it is arguable that those who consciously make a personal choice give away all their personal belongings other than perhaps the absolute minimum they NEED - to those more needy ... are 'saints' - if their personal choices accept that, and whether officially acknowledged or not.     I agree it would be great if the world was at peace with itself and everyone, and no-one went hungry or feared for their childrens futures, and there was no greed, or fear or hate or even want - but this is the real world, and we have to deal with it in real ways.   Not even Star Treks federation is close, let alone the reality we need to deal with.
    • This will be won’t pay more.  The Ex-husband got his ex-wife to go to mediation to sort out the financial side because they own property together.  The ex-wife did not like what she heard from the mediator and would not cooperate. So they wasted 3 visits. Afterwards she arranged another mediation meeting but just for herself without the ex-husband involved and paid over £120 to tell the mediation service how shit she thought they were. Then told the ex-husband what she had done.     Now here’s a new bit of information at the moment the ex’s have one of their houses up for sale, can my sister put a lean on the house?  If yes, how does she put the lean only on the ex-wife’s part of the money
    • I have had to fill in a declaration a few times. southern Water are the worst performing Water provider in the UK. They have even been investigated by the Serious Fraud Office.    I have no doubts there will be many vulnerable Southern Water customers with similar issues who are not aware there Watersure Tariff has been wrongfully  removed.   The culture within Southern Water as I have experienced lacks transparency. The Customer Service Manager used language that removed all blame from Southern Water. Instead of saying they would accurately re bill me he said he would look into the overpayments Inhabe been making!!
  • Our picks

cosalt

Response to our Egg CCA request - Please Help !

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3679 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Typical Egg agreement. It is unenforcable becasue it doesn't have the prescreibed terms. It should have a term telling you what your credit limit is. Instead you have an approved limit - whatever that is. That is meaningless and does not comply with teh Consumer Crdit Act 1974 and its associated regulations.

  • Haha 1

Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Typical Egg agreement. It is unenforcable becasue it doesn't have the prescreibed terms. It should have a term telling you what your credit limit is. Instead you have an approved limit - whatever that is. That is meaningless and does not comply with teh Consumer Crdit Act 1974 and its associated regulations.

 

 

Thanks so much, TBH I thought it looked ok, I did notice the heading was wrong - should read 'Credit Card Agreement' not 'Credit Agreement'

 

Any idea what sort of letter I should send in response, or should I do nothing. This account is now with 'Collect Direct' not egg.

 

Cosalt :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would write and tell Collect Direct that Egg have "provided you with a copy agreement which does not compply with s61(1) of the CCA 1974 and te associated regulations and is therefore only enforceable by an order of the court by virtue of s65. However, since it does not have a term concerning the credit limit (rather, it defines an "Approved Limit" - whatever that is) as required by Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983, the court would be prevented from granting such an order by virtue of s127(3)".

 

Attach a copy of the agreement that Egg sent.

 

You could offer them a few quid in full and final settlement as a gesture of goodwill (they wil have bought it from Egg for about 20p in the £1). If you have a default associated with this, you should add that you expect that CD will remove the default as required by the Data Protection Act 1984 since it is obviously incorrect as no agreement existed between you and Egg. Tell them that, ifthey refuse, you will commence court proceedings against them undser s14 of the DPA 1984.


Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this:-

 

Dear CD

 

Thank you for you letter dated XXXXXX, unfortunately egg have provided you with a copy agreement which does not compply with s61(1) of the CCA 1974 and the associated regulations and is therefore only enforceable by an order of the court by virtue of s65. However, since it does not have a term concerning the credit limit (rather, it defines an "Approved Limit" - whatever that is) as required by Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983, the court would be prevented from granting such an order by virtue of s127(3)

 

As a measure of goodwill I would be prepared to offer the sum of £2000 in full and final settlement of this account on the basis that you remove any default that you have registered with any credit reference agency as required by the Data Protection Act 1984 since it is obviously incorrect as no agreement existed between you and Egg. If you refuse, you will commence court proceedings against them under s14 of the Data Protection Act 1984.

 

I look forward to your favourable reply within the next seven days.

 

Cosalt

 

 

The a balance is actually about £12.5K I just though we would offer them that. If they accepted it would I then be able to offer them say £100 for 20 months ?

 

Thanks

 

Cosalt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about this:-

 

Dear CD

 

Thank you for you letter dated XXXXXX, unfortunately egg have provided you with a copy agreement which does not compply with s61(1) of the CCA 1974 and the associated regulations and is therefore only enforceable by an order of the court by virtue of s65. However, since it does not have a term concerning the credit limit (rather, it defines an "Approved Limit" - whatever that is) as required by Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983, the court would be prevented from granting such an order by virtue of s127(3)

 

As a measure of goodwill I would be prepared to offer the sum of £2000 in full and final settlement of this account on the basis that you remove any default that you have registered with any credit reference agency as required by the Data Protection Act 1984 since it is obviously incorrect as no agreement existed between you and Egg. If you refuse, you will commence court proceedings against them under s14 of the Data Protection Act 1984.

 

I look forward to your favourable reply within the next seven days.

 

Cosalt

 

 

The a balance is actually about £12.5K I just though we would offer them that. If they accepted it would I then be able to offer them say £100 for 20 months ?

 

Thanks

 

Cosalt

 

 

Might it be better to state you will pay them monthly? Instead of saying 2k as a goodwill gesture, which suggests you will pay them a lump sum of 2k :)

 

I could be wrong..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thik cadencalex is correct. If they refuse the gesture of goodwill, you could probably not pay them anything at all. Don't take that course without advice though and certainly not on mine alone.


Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so are you suggesting it would be best that I not offer them anything at present, and maybe see what they come back with in defence of my claim that the agreement is not enforceable ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That mihgt be best


Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to barge in on this thread but I think its also relevant to mine a little further down. I think my agreement is unenforceable for the same reason but would like some advice if possible. My debt is still with Egg, would the letter above be suitable for me to send them if I adapt it slightly?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/egg/175717-egg-cca-questions.html

 

There is also a thread for my Egg loan if anyone is able to check the agreement and see if it looks ok (pretty please) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes kirklanw

 

Your agreement is identical so you could send Egg the same letter suitably modified


Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this ?

 

Dear CD

 

Thank you for you letter dated XXXXXX, unfortunately egg have provided you with a copy agreement which does not comply with s61(1) of the CCA 1974 and the associated regulations and is therefore only enforceable by an order of the court by virtue of s65. However, since it does not have a term concerning the credit limit (rather, it defines an "Approved Limit" - whatever that is) as required by Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983, the court would be prevented from granting such an order by virtue of s127(3)

 

I trust you will now be in a position to reduce the balance on this account to £0 and remove any default that you have registered with any credit reference agency as required by the Data Protection Act 1984 since it is obviously incorrect as no agreement existed between me and Egg. If you refuse, I will commence court proceedings against you under s14 of the Data Protection Act 1984.

 

I look forward to your favourable reply within the next fourteen days.

 

Cosalt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DNs are issued and notified to CRAs by Egg. CD have no involvement in this. Some go after Egg, others tackle the CRAs for publishing allegedly untrue info. Far from easy.

 

Thanks so should I say they should ask egg to remove the default markers or just not bother mentioning that at all ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks so should I say they should ask egg to remove the default markers or just not bother mentioning that at all ?

 

If I were you, I would definitely be mentioning that you want the Default removed by EGG - the debts aren't half as much as a problem as the Defaults. In my humble opinion, anyway :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone, no amended to this, any good ?

 

Dear CD

 

Thank you for you letter dated XXXXXX, unfortunately egg have provided you with a copy agreement which does not comply with s61(1) of the CCA 1974 and the associated regulations and is therefore only enforceable by an order of the court by virtue of s65. However, since it does not have a term concerning the credit limit (rather, it defines an "Approved Limit" - whatever that is) as required by Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983, the court would be prevented from granting such an order by virtue of s127(3)

 

I trust you will now be in a position to reduce the balance on this account to £0 and request EGG to remove any default that has registered with any credit reference agency as required by the Data Protection Act 1984 since it is obviously incorrect as no agreement existed between me and Egg. If you refuse, I will commence court proceedings against you under s14 of the Data Protection Act 1984.

 

I look forward to your favourable reply within the next fourteen days.

 

Cosalt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You write in a tone suggesting you almost believe CD are gentlemen. :rolleyes:

 

 

Not sure what you are reffering to?

 

What do you suggest I send then, something along the lines of-

 

' get stuffed, I am not paying you a penny, I hope you suffer a nasty accident '

 

:confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, could somebody possibly confirm that this part of the letter as underlined below refers to the incorrect heading on the agreement.

 

If so I think we have established in other threads that this only applies to post 2005 agreements ?

 

Thanks

 

 

Dear CD

 

Thank you for you letter dated XXXXXX, unfortunately egg have provided you with a copy agreement which does not comply with s61(1) of the CCA 1974 and the associated regulations and is therefore only enforceable by an order of the court by virtue of s65. However, since it does not have a term concerning the credit limit (rather, it defines an "Approved Limit" - whatever that is) as required by Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983, the court would be prevented from granting such an order by virtue of s127(3)

 

I trust you will now be in a position to reduce the balance on this account to £0 and request EGG to remove any default that has registered with any credit reference agency as required by the Data Protection Act 1984 since it is obviously incorrect as no agreement existed between me and Egg. If you refuse, I will commence court proceedings against you under s14 of the Data Protection Act 1984.

 

I look forward to your favourable reply within the next fourteen days.

 

Cosalt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cosalt

 

Am I missing something, or do you mean "pre 2005", not "post 2005"?

 

 

Hi, no I do mean 'post 2005'

 

I think we have established on another thread that the heading 'credit card agreement' is only required on agreements after 2005. Earlier ones can say 'credit agreement'

 

Here is the link-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/173059-credit-agreement-credit-card.html

 

Bit of a bummer as I was depending on that in defence of some of my agreements :mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davefirewalkers poston that thread is the important one. Having the wrong heading would make the agreement not properly executed but it would not make it unenforceable.

 

Enforceability (for agreements signed before Dec 2006) depends on only 2 things - having an agreement with your signature and having an agreement with the prescribed terms. After 2006, you have to persuade a judge on a case-by-case basis.


Steven

 

Using CAG Toolbar will generate much needed income - Download Here

 

Confused by Simple Interest? Confounded by Compound Interest? Read my Interest Tutorial

My Wins

 GE Money Won unconditionally May 2007

NatWest Won unconditionally August 2007

Brighthouse Won unconditionally August 2007

Goldfish Won unconditionally April 2008 (including CI on the basis of Sempra)

Clydesdale Financial Services (now BPF) Won unconditionally February 2008

 

Any opinions are without prejudice & without liability. Do not take any legal action on my advice alone. Almost everything I know concerning the law I learned from this site.

 

Please note, I will not give advice by PM. Please send a link to your thread and I will do my best to answer there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Davefirewalkers poston that thread is the important one. Having the wrong heading would make the agreement not properly executed but it would not make it unenforceable.

 

Enforceability (for agreements signed before Dec 2006) depends on only 2 things - having an agreement with your signature and having an agreement with the prescribed terms. After 2006, you have to persuade a judge on a case-by-case basis.

 

 

Thanks Steven, I understand it pretty clearly now.

 

In the case of my agreement, it means that CD would have to take me to court in order to enforce the agreement because the heading is wrong, however the court can not enforce it because it is missing a prescribed term ie: nowhere does it say 'credit limit' 'approved limit' could mean anything, a limit to how many times I can use it, a limit to the types of things I can buy with it, a limit to when I can use it etc etc etc.

 

I will now send the letter as per earlier post and see what argument CD come back with. :)

Edited by cosalt
Spelt your name wrong, sorry !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi cosalt – it would refer to any error in the agreement – no credit limit or statement to that affect would make it improperly executed as well because a prescribed term is missing or incorrectly stated. It just so happens that the term ‘Credit limit’ is a prescribed term regarding s127(3) as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...