Davey vs Amex

[davey77]

Anyone have any thoughts of what would be accepted by the CRAs as a Notice of Correction. I understand they are restrictive on the wording you can use (to cover themselves i should imagine).

 

I have two possibilities. One softer than the other.

 

What i would prefer:

 

"Account in dispute. Failure to supply properly executed and enforceable credit card agreement conforming fully to Consumer Credit Act 1974 requirements - Legal action being considered to resolve dispute."

 

Or the tame version:

 

"Account in dispute. It is my belief the credit agreement pertaining to this account does not conform to the CCA1974. Negotiations underway to resolve issues."

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello Davey77!

 

How about the one you would prefer with some knobs, bells and tinsel:

 

Account in serious and valid legal dispute owing to a complete failure to produce either a properly executed Regulated Credit Card Agreement in full compliance with The Consumer Credit Act 1974, or a valid data consent in full compliance with The Data Protection Act 1998.

Cheers,

BRW

[davey77]

Hello Davey77!

 

How about the one you would prefer with some knobs, bells and tinsel:

 

Cheers,

BRW

 

Oh yes! I like that. Thanks.

[Desperate Daniella]

Are you going to write back to Julie and say she appears not to have read your paragraph asking about securitisation?

 

DD

[the_shadow]

Hello Davey77!

 

How about the one you would prefer with some knobs, bells and tinsel:

 

Cheers,

BRW

 

If that works I'm knicking it :p:p

 

Cheers..

 

S.

[davey77]

Are you going to write back to Julie and say she appears not to have read your paragraph asking about securitisation?

 

DD

 

I will leave it a couple of weeks for the moment to see if anything else arrives. By then the SAR will be in the post.

 

I consider their last response not to be a valid reply to my letter so am pretty much ignoring it for the moment. My view is they have not replied so if and when i do write again i will ignore the content of that letter as if they hadn't written to me at all.

[davey77]

If that works I'm knicking it :p:p

 

Cheers..

 

S.

 

lol

[davey77]

So much for the LBA then if this means what i think it means:

 

Judge freezes credit claims

[davey77]

 

[Desperate Daniella]

Morning Davey,

 

Well Julie's letter said it was their final response, and that response was to ignore the points raised in your letter, and they sent this the following day. If they are just not answering perfectly valid questions I think you have to go to the FOS.

 

I sent a reminder to them this week as I have had no response at all.

 

DD

[davey77]

Morning DD...

 

My plan is to send a SAR. Quite a specific and detailed one including a request for information regarding their securitisation.

 

Nope not the FOS for this one.. been there, done that... got the t-shirt. They will not help re a CCA complaint. In fact they will only make matters worse. I'm avoiding the biased and ex-banker infiltrated FOS:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/183738-why-does-fos-take-2.html#post2016037

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi Davey,

 

Thanks. I'll look at that link. I found FOS very helpful on another matter, but I haven't had a response to my letter of complaint to Capone about the CCA so haven't yet gone back to FOS about that. Why do you think they make things worse?

 

DD

[davey77]

They can, sometimes, be helpful. It's a very long wait and like reallymadwomen you have to do a lot of work to help them out. Complaints re other matters including PPI may have a better chance of success but a complaint re valid agreements don't stand a chance.

 

They make matters worse because the Creditor use the opinion of the FOS employee against us later. The CPR letter i sent to HFC at the beginning of this year was responded to with "i understand the FOS decision last year was unfavourable to you". In point of fact, that was one adjudicator that was neutral in his stance but HFC tried to use that to ignore the issues i was raising.

 

Also, during Cap1 mediation they refused to compromise stating "the previous FOS decision backs up our position (re validity of the 'agreement').

 

So all in all i wish i hadn't gone to the FOS and waited 9 months for them to give the creditor more unfounded and false ammunition to use against me.

[davey77]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/175651-complaints-about-fos.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/136654-complaining-financial-ombudsman-service.html

[Desperate Daniella]

Thank you so much for that Davey. That is very useful info. I have tipped your scales.

 

DD

[davey77]

Thank you so much for that Davey. That is very useful info. I have tipped your scales.

 

DD

 

Thanks!

[davey77]

[davey77]

Experian Consumer Help Service:

 

Dear Mr Davey

 

Thank you for your email, which we received on 07 May 2009.

 

Re: Notice of Correction Request

 

Thank you for sending us your Notice of Correction. I cannot add this as is may defame the companies you are referring too.

 

WHAT I HAVE DONE FOR YOU:

 

- I have changed the wording a little and would like you to consider using this instead.

 

"ACCOUNT IN SERIOUS AND VALID LEGAL DISPUTE OWING TO WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE A COMPLETE FAILURE TO PRODUCE EITHER A PROPERLY EXECUTED REGULATED CREDIT CARD AGREEMENT IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974, OR A VALID DATA CONSENT IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998. MR 'davey."

 

 

WHAT I RECOMMEND YOU DO NEXT:

 

- Please let me know in writing or by return email whether you are happy with this.

 

 

FURTHER INFORMATION:

 

- You might like to use a different statement of your own. However, if you still want me to use your original statement, please let me know and I will send it to the Information Commissioner for a ruling.

 

Kind regards

[davey77]

[citizenB]

Hmm, they didnt give you much time from their politish request on the 17th to the issue of the DN on the 19th did they ?..

 

So in what way were you defaming companies, Davey ?. It is of course ok for the company in question to defame you by reporting without consent / CCA ?

 

Are you going to go with their version ?

[alangee]

Another duff Default Notice from Amex, not allowing you 14 clear days from date of service. The termination/cancellation should arrive in about 5 weeks if they are true to form.

 

Alan

[davey77]

Hi CB, no they are moving fast on this one.. scared of me probably!

 

The difference for the notice of correction is in the addition of the word 'I believe'.

 

"ACCOUNT IN SERIOUS AND VALID LEGAL DISPUTE OWING TO WHAT I BELIEVE TO BE A COMPLETE FAILURE etc...."

 

A statement of belief rather than a statement of fact. I can live with that to be honest.

[banker_rhymes_with]

Hello Davey77!

 

A statement of belief rather than a statement of fact.

I'd stick with the original statement of fact!

 

If the Debt Industry poodles at the CRA send it to the ICO for a ruling, that could be interesting if only to hear what they say. If you have the evidence, then I can't see what the ICO would have to complain about...although the most likely is they will side with the Debt Industry, as they tend to do if they think they can get away with it.

 

But, you must run with what you are happy with. I'm always up for any fight with the bankers, DCAs or CRAs, so I tend to look at these things from an all out assault basis. No prisoners, because they never do anything decent when it comes to the Consumer.

 

It's war as far as I'm concerned.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Edited May 21, 2009 by banker_rhymes_with
Can't type.

[citizenB]

Ah, I see. Yes, I guess if you are ok with that. At least you do have something attached to the reporting which is one good thing.

[citizenB]

Hello Davey77!

 

I'd stick with the original statement of fact!

 

If the Debt Industry poodles at the CRA send it to the ICO for a ruling, that could be interesting if only to hear what they say. If you have the evidence, then I can't see what the ICO would have to complain about...although the most likely is they will side with the Debt Industry, as they tend to do if they think they can get away with it.

 

But, you must run with what you are happy with. I'm always up for any fight with the bankers, DCAs or CRAs, so I tend to look at these things from an all out assault basis. No prisoners, because they never do anything decent when it comes to the Consumer.

 

It's war as far as I'm concerned.

 

Cheers,

BRW

 

For which you need the right equipment......