Capone response to CCA

[exchange]

Crapone letter.pdf

 

Crapone info.pdf

 

Crapone agreement.pdf

 

Copy of Crapone my reply.pdf

 

Attached response from Capone to CCA request. Tried to post this under Capone forum but could not attach anything.

 

I have replied with dispute letter but wanted to add to the list of rubbish responses from this lot. The agreement they say is original has a date '0208' in the corner which I reckon is at least 5 years after I may have signed any agreement!

[creditcardmug]

Hi, this is the normal twaddle from cap1, you have sent them a letter putting the matter in dispute, my advice is to ignore them now, or you will be engaged in endless, we are right you are wrong exchanges.

 

The acc will be passed next to one of the well known (on here) DCAs, get back to us then

 

Regards CCM

[exchange]

Thanks, I appreciate the response CCM. As I am not living in the UK but in another EU country the response may be different to the norm. I will post when I receive something.

[AA99]

Subbing here. We have an account with a £200 credit limit that we've had over 100 calls from the Mumbai Call Centre for So tedious Ellie:p

[exchange]

Hi AA99.

Your post makes me wonder about their business sense. A £200 credit limit can hardly justify the cost of paying someone to make 100 + calls no matter how little they pay people in Mumbai!

[AA99]

Hi AA99.

Your post makes me wonder about their business sense. A £200 credit limit can hardly justify the cost of paying someone to make 100 + calls no matter how little they pay people in Mumbai!

 

Exactly why I turned down their £8 refund letter, told them I'd spent more than that on recorded delivery letters

[exchange]

Mint 'Original' agreement.pdf

 

Current Agreement.pdf

 

Hi All,

 

I am attaching the response I got from RBS to this thread as for some reason I can't upload anything on the RBS forum. I will post this via a link on the thread I started under RBS forum! Aargh!

[cerberusalert]

[ATTACH]7434[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH]7435[/ATTACH]

 

Hi All,

 

I am attaching the response I got from RBS to this thread as for some reason I can't upload anything on the RBS forum. I will post this via a link on the thread I started under RBS forum! Aargh!

 

It's an application form which does not contain any of the 'prescribed terms' i.e., credit limit, repayment terms, %APR etc. within the four corners of the signed agreement. The T&C's are not linked to the document.

[exchange]

Thanks for the quick response cerberusalert. What about the references in the T&C's to the same 9.9% deal as shown on the first page offered until 31 Jan 1998? wouldn't this be enough to tie them together? Don't get me wrong, I would be happier if it is unenforceable, it just looks to me that there is a strong likelihood they are front and back of the same document. If they are, my untrained eye thinks it may be enforceable. I hope I'm wrong!

[exchange]

Sorry, should have quoted deal is until 1 January 1998 on front and back. Not 31 January 1998.

[cerberusalert]

It doesn't matter because an agreement *must have* the prescribed terms within the four corners of the signed document.

[exchange]

Thanks, anyone else please before I send a snotty letter to RBS.

They say they have applied my £1 fee for the CCA request to my account which I thought they were not allowed to do!

[cerberusalert]

Try this when you respond;

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Re:− Account/Reference

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

I have received the documents you sent and in the accompanying letter you you have confirmed this to be a true copy of the credit agreement that exists in relation to this account. As you have sent this document in response to a formal request under Section 78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, this statement is now binding on you as per section 172 of the Act.

 

I must inform you that the information received does not meet the requirements of a properly executed credit agreement under the 1974 Act.The document received does not contain any of the prescribed terms as set out in the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) Schedule 6 Column 2.

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

The absence of a properly executed credit agreement prevents you from:

Adding interest to the account

Taking any enforcement action on the account

Issuing any default notices or registering any default marker with a credit reference agency

This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

 

 

 

 

Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 633, Sir Andrew Morritt, Vice Chancellor said:

The creditor must…be taken to have made a voluntary disposition, or gift, of the loan monies to the debtor. The creditor had chosen to part with the monies in circumstances in which it was never entitled to have them repaid

In the case of Dimond v Lovell [2000] UKHL 27, Lord Hoffmann said:

Parliament intended that if a consumer credit agreement was improperly executed, then subject to the enforcement powers of the court, the debtor should not have to pay.

I would also point out that if you continue to pursue me for this debt while it is dispute you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines.

 

 

 

 

What I Require

I require all correspondence in writing from here on; any persistent attempts to contact me by phone will be reported to trading standards

I require you to produce a compliant copy of my credit agreement to confirm I am liable to you or any organisation, which you represent for this alleged debt, if you cannot do so I require written clarification that this is the case.

Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40

 

Since the agreement is unenforceable it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for you to write the alleged debt off. I suggest you give serious consideration to this as any attempt of litigation will be vigorously defended and I will counter claim for all quantifiable damages

 

 

Yours Faithfully

Your name Printed not signed

[exchange]

I like the letter, thanks for that. I would welcome other opinions though as I am sure they will fight this.

[exchange]

bump

[AA99]

bump

 

Cerberusalert has over 3000 posts on here, do what you're told

[exchange]

AA99, I have no doubt that cerberusalert may well be correct. I guess I just wanted confirmation I am doing the right thing from more than one source. So if anyone else would mind looking and giving an opinion it would give me more confidence to fight RBS on this one.

I have two accounts in dispute already, one with M&S and one with CapOne which I feel far more confident about.

I also have two MBNA accounts in dispute as they have sent me nothing to date.

I will post more as I get responses.

 

Thanks in advance to anyone else who replies.

[exchange]

By the way, if you look through the thread it is the RBS Mint agreements on Post 7 I am looking for confirmation on, not the Capone ones at the beginning.

[Series3]

By the way, if you look through the thread it is the RBS Mint agreements on Post 7 I am looking for confirmation on, not the Capone ones at the beginning.

 

 

 

He gave you the answer and the letter..

He's right....great letter by the way.

[griffin036]

It's an application form which does not contain any of the 'prescribed terms' i.e., credit limit, repayment terms, %APR etc. within the four corners of the signed agreement. The T&C's are not linked to the document.

 

exchange - Ive had the same docs as you re application form and "conditions of use" which would appear to be on the reverse of the application form - in which case the prescribed terms are all present and "within the four corners" of the agreement. My only issues with this is that 1) the application form is barely legible in places and completely illegible in others, and

2) the "Conditions of use" appear to be of a different (ie much better ) quality in terms of reproduction than the "Application Form" of which it is supposed to be the reverse of.

I've sent a/c in dispute letter re illegibility, and had the standard reply saying they have complied to request under s78 by supplying a copy of the credit card agreement and original terms and conditions, however they fail to address the issue that all the small print on the credit card agreement is illegible. They also say they will not enter into any further correspondance regarding CCA breaches and do not consider the account to be in dispute and will be pursueing me for the full repayment. In the meantime had letter of Triton "Payment Demand" to which I replied with the bemused letter, no response as yet.

I dont want to hijack your thread, but will subscribe as my situation is the same as regards to CCA and "is it, isnt it enforceable".

[exchange]

Thanks for the reply griffin. I suspected that some may interpret this as enforceable and that RBS are likely to say it is front and back of the same piece of paper. I noticed that the front page is not as good quality as the alleged back page as well which is why I too suspect it is not the same as on the original application. Does this mean that it still satisfies the interpretation of a 'true copy' though as they do seem linked in the sense that the information ties up front and back?

If however they do not hold the real original application form with my actual original signature on it but just a copy on their system microfiched can this still be used in court if it came to it? It looks to me as if they hold a copy of my application on microfiche but have sent a copy of the terms & conditions applicable at the time. What is to stop them copying those t&c's onto the back of a copy of the application and presenting that as a true copy in court? Sorry to ask so many questions but I still feel unsure about this one.

Thanks again to anyone with further responses and opinions.

[exchange]

bump

[exchange]

bump

[cerberusalert]

If they were stupid enough to take this to court they would lose...period!

 

If you are still nervous about it you could do a SAR which would cost you £10, but you would still get the same rubbish application form which would be just as unenforceable in law.

[exchange]

OK! Thanks for the reassurance. I will send your letter. Thanks for the support.