*** A+ vs RBS MINT - ENFORCEABLE?????? ***

[A+]

Hi, another creditor, another thread

 

Brief background. Years of threats and hassle, mostly ignored and docs thrown away in the past. Many letter from Apex, especially those really annoying telegram style things, even after a CCA request, still sending them.

 

Late last year i was told by Apex to go to OC for CCA requests. I did so, wrote to MINT (RBS) and received back the same letter i got from my RBS card when i CCAd them. Letters scanned below, as well as claimed credit agreement. Scanned below, covering letter and alleged agreement. Underneath the agreement was the usual nicely present printed terms and conditions and some reprinted statements.

Here are the scans, grateful for advice on whether this agreement is enforceable please.

 

 

[clemma]

I would have to say enforceable as all the prescribed terms are there, as is your signature.

[A+]

Thanks Clemma. Yes it looked pretty good to me.

I am not sure if anybody else could confirm their opinions? No disrespect to Clemma as i think you are right, but in the past i have scanned stuff in, got comments one way, then someone else has spotted something which blew the CCA out the water, and obviously this would be nice to repeat if at all possible, not hopefully at this stage but worth being sure before negotiating the pennies i have in my piggy bank

[the_shadow]

I too think its enforceable as the prescribed terms are there, I notice they put the £1 CCA payment towards your account though.. bit naughty:D

 

PmW

[A+]

Thanks.

So i guess next step is to SAR them?

 

One other thing, i noticed people on here talking about Default Notices and TERMINATIONS. I have no idea what this means. I have definitely had DN from this company in the past, but no records of it. Will this info come in SAR?

Thanks again

[spartathisis]

If the Default notice is defective then it throws a spanner in the works for them. I sent sar but did not receive a copy of the DN, luckily I had kept the copy they had sent and it was/is defective, ask for it specifically when requesting the SAR and they may send it.

[the_shadow]

Unfortunately or fortunately in some cases the default notices they send out tend to be template letters so they run them off and dont keep them themselves, I've seen on here cases get to court and they have produced "what the default would have looked like" with a guess on the date it was sent.

 

This notice is very important cos if they make a mistake on it and terminate it could really screw them on the basis of what they are allowed to recover.

 

PmW

[A+]

God now i am GUTTTTTTTED. (That wasn't suppose to be a welsh accent )

I wish i had kept stuff in the past, but after several years of this cr*p and many house moves in that time, i just kept throwing stuff once i had piles.... (of papers )

 

They must know about this, so i am guessing a SAR won't help me as they probably don't have the original DN they sent.

 

DDDDAAAAMMMMNNNNNN:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

[the_shadow]

God now i am GUTTTTTTTED. (That wasn't suppose to be a welsh accent )

I wish i had kept stuff in the past, but after several years of this cr*p and many house moves in that time, i just kept throwing stuff once i had piles.... (of papers )

 

They must know about this, so i am guessing a SAR won't help me as they probably don't have the original DN they sent.

 

DDDDAAAAMMMMNNNNNN:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

 

Unfortunately hindsight is gods way of poking you in the eye:D

 

I wish I'd kept copies of all the CCA's I'd filled in... I then wouldnt need to battle to see sight of them:mad:

[Alphageek]

Should it not say "Credit Card Agreement" - a slight technicality.

[A+]

Hi Alphageek, not as far as i know, but you seem to have been around on here for some time, so i would not claim to know as much as you about this stuff. Perhaps someone else could comment?

My understanding is it must say CREDIT AGREEMENT, or not necessarily but it must clearly be understandable as referring to the amount of credit allowed, i.e. Approved Limit would not be sufficient to satisfy the "Prescribed Terms" part of the CCA 1974

OPEN TO OFFERS ON THIS

[A+]

Hey PMW, lets poke God back in the eye ! I have just raided a very old brief case i found in the shed. Inside is a 4 inch stack of threats and letters from DCAs!! Maybe i will find one or two in here, here's hoping

[Alphageek]

The wording should be "CREDIT CARD AGREEMENT REGULATED BY THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974"

 

What year did you open the account?

Edited April 1, 2009 by Alphageek
Added question

[A+]

near the end of 2003 this was allegedly signed by me.

I have not heard that it has to say Credit Card Agreement, i see now that you mean at the TOP, not where the credit limit is being discussed. Totally new to me this.

[abbacus]

It looks like a copy of a scanned document. Nat West (part of RBS) seem to scan their agrements to archive them, then destroy the original. The same may apply here. Unfortunately you will never know unless it gets to Court and they are obliged to produce the original!

[A+]

thanks for that abbacus, as another member has pointed out on another thread, a great idea (in my view) is to write to dispute the original agreement ever looked like that, and request to VISIT THE OC'S OFFICES TO SEE THE ORGINALS IN PERSON. At least that sounds reasonable and like you have a genuine concern. If they refuse by letter, then that may help in court and shows a reasonable approach. It could also be argued that you tried to save court time and costs by going direct, but they flatly refused and therefore you now wish to see the original as your suspicions have been raised. I think this is a great idea, anyone agree?

[A+]

Hey guys......

I have found some old paperwork.

I found a letter from MINT saying they will be sending me a Default Notice. Then i must have lost that, but the next letter i have is a termination notice whatever that is when its at home.

I have pasted both pages of the letter below. is this any use to me in this case?

 

 

Edited April 2, 2009 by A+
got link wrong

[SkemDosser]

A+

thanks for that abbacus, as another member has pointed out on another thread, a great idea (in my view) is to write to dispute the original agreement ever looked like that, and request to VISIT THE OC'S OFFICES TO SEE THE ORGINALS IN PERSON. At least that sounds reasonable and like you have a genuine concern. If they refuse by letter, then that may help in court and shows a reasonable approach. It could also be argued that you tried to save court time and costs by going direct, but they flatly refused and therefore you now wish to see the original as your suspicions have been raised. I think this is a great idea, anyone agree?

 

SD:

I've just quoted the above as a starting reference point for your thread.

 

Yep, looks enforceable although there are technicalities but you have to be careful at not clutching at straws.

 

The bottom line is it's obviously a copy and it's very unlikely the original exists. there's always s.59[1] you can use against them about pre-contractural agreements not being bona fide executed agreements, not watertight but good for muddying the waters.

 

Strategically, you need to assess clearly what the likelihood is now that they really will persue you with litigation. you mentioned in another thread that you're flat broke, doing numerous jobs, behind with the rent etc....do your creditors know this? If they don't, tell them and if they do, well I think a while back they will have decided you're a no hoper, will get what pennies they can out of you, and are already concentrating their over worked resources [bless 'em lol] on bigger fish.

 

If you're skint, you can't afford to pay them a penny and tell them that. Ask for a write-off...if they don't do that, at least you have evidence you've taken the situation seriously and informed them in the past fully of your personal circumstances if it ever goes to court.

 

Strategically, bone up on the CPR. Invoking the correct provisions at the outset of any legal action [highly unlikely IMHO but there you go] by demanding the production of original documents etc can stop them in their tracks and also remember, something a lot of people seem to forget, there is a lot of opening provisions in the CPR for MEDIATION- the judicial system really wants to see court action as a very last resort and, if you are a genuine can't payer, this will beome obvious then, and if the creditor is still stupid enough to go ahead...well they're going to look like intransigent bozos, particularly if they can't produce an original agreement, and you are heading for getting costs back.

 

Not that I reckon it would ever go that far; I do think, paticularly these days, the first whiff on any legitimate resistance to court action will stop a creditor in it's tracks, and CPR can do that. So the agreement looks on paper enforceable? Okay, but considering your personal circumstances, so what? What are they going to do, tell you to sell your blood? [oops shouldn't have mentioned that, DCA's read this, don't want to give them any ideas lol]

[SkemDosser]

It's a shame you threw a lot of stuff away but understandable, 20/20 hindsight and all that.

Might be worth having a look for any stray bits of paper though; I'm anally retentive about keeping paperwork [to my wife's annoyance lol] and you'd be surprised how much stuff comes back from creditors with the interest rates slightly different from your first bill, defective DN's etc and altho' you may not have all of your own relevant paperwork anymore, neither do the creditors a lot of the time.

[A+]

Thanks Skem. In your second to last post, was the text after it said "SD:" meant for me? Sorry i wasn't sure if you were addressing someone else called SD.

I know nothing about CPR etc, but you have hit the nail on the head in many ways, i have nothing i can sell to pay them, and i have no dough. Why did you say its unlikely they have the original agreement?

thanks very much

[SkemDosser]

Thanks Skem. In your second to last post, was the text after it said "SD:" meant for me? Sorry i wasn't sure if you were addressing someone else called SD.

I know nothing about CPR etc, but you have hit the nail on the head in many ways, i have nothing i can sell to pay them, and i have no dough. Why did you say its unlikely they have the original agreement?

thanks very much

Sorry yes the message was for you, SD means it was me talking lol

 

It looks like the info they sent you is microfiched- that means its 99.9% certain they shredded the original ages ago, otherwise why microfiche? That's why I said it's unlikely that they have the original agreement in their posession anymore. In what I reckon is the unlikely event they persue litigation, invoke the right CPR asking for them to produce the original in court, ask for mediation etc and it should stop them in their tracks.

 

I wouldn't worry too much about the intricies of CPR right now- just look at the relevant bits when you feel like it [as it were a hobby lol] so that you can feel comfortable knowing you have a fall back strategy if you need it. You shouldn't do, unless they start issuing court papers which I reckon in your situation, like mine, isn't very likely so long as you are straight with them and, basically, tell them you're skint and they'll realise they have bigger fish to fry

[A+]

Thanks Skem. Yes everything you say makes a lot of sense to me, probably due to the similarities in our situations. I am going to do exactly as you suggest. For now i will await a reply to my last letter where i disputed the validity of the agreement they sent me. When i hear back, i shall just respond with a letter again stating my doubts, but with the added mention of the fact that i have absolutely NO resources to offer settlements and don't expect to in the near future, which is the complete truth. I will also ask if i can visit their offices to see an original agreement if they hold one.

Thanks very much for your advice and support

[pussycatdoll]

Can you remember signing that CCA for mint? Is it in the same format as they sent you.

 

I believe mint have done the following but I cant prove it yet.

 

Scanned in the ts and c's they wanted to apply to the card and scanned in the signature strip from the application. Then stamped it to make it look like its executed and in a format that will stop too many querying the original's existance.

 

PCD

[A+]

Blimey, well as i have said on various threads, there is FAR too much doubt in my mind about how these companies behave in regards to CCA and agreements, that from now on, i want to see an original before i will acknowledge the debt in any way. If that lands me in court, so be it, but my reasons will be explained in letter many times before i get to court, so if court comes and i havent seen it, i would hope that at least SOME judges would see i have had concerns about the agreement and will force production of the original.