Invalid Default Notices

[Pinky69]

Under the Companies Act 1985 your company must state its name (as it appears in its memorandum of association) in certain places and on its business stationery. Your company must also give certain information on all its business letters and order forms.

1. Where must the company name be displayed?

Every company must paint or affix its name on the outside of every office or place in which its business is carried on - even if it is a director's home. The name must be kept painted or affixed and it must be both conspicuous and legible.

2. On which documents must the company name be shown?

The company must state its name, in legible lettering, on the following:

 

all the company's business letters;

 

all its notices and other official publications;

 

all bills of exchange, promissory notes, endorsements, cheques and orders for money or goods purporting to besigned by, or on behalf of, the company;

 

all its bills of parcels, invoices, receipts and letters of credit.

 

3. Must the company show any other details?

Yes. On all its business letters and order forms the company must show in legible lettering:

 

Its place of registration and its registered number. The place of registration must be one of the following, as appropriate:

For companies registered in England and Wales:

 

Registered in Cardiff

Registered in England and Wales

Registered in England

Registered in London

Registered in Wales

 

For companies registered in Scotland:

Registered in Scotland

Registered in Edinburgh

 

The address of the registered office. If a business letter or order form mentions more than one address, it is recommended that you state which is the registered office address.

4. Must directors' names be shown?

A company does not have to state the directors' names on its business letters but, if it chooses to do so it must state the names of all its directors. In other words a company cannot be selective about which directors' names it shows - it must show all of them or none of them.

5. Must anything else be shown?

Certain categories of company must also state the following additional information on their business letters and order forms:

 

For an investment company (as defined by section 266 of the Companies Act 1985), that it is such a company.

 

For a company exempt from using the word 'limited' in its name, the fact that it is a limited company.

 

For a company with share capital, it is not necessary to state the share capital on stationery but, if the company chooses to do so, it must state its paid-up share capital, not its authorised capital.

6. Are there special rules for charitable companies?

Under section 68 of the Charities Act 1993, a charitable company whose name does not include the word 'charity' or 'charitable' must state the fact that it is a charity on all the documents listed under question 2, in all bills it sends and on any conveyances it executes.

Section 68 does not require a charitable company to include the word 'charity' or 'charitable' in its name.

The Charities Act 1993 does not apply to charitable companies registered in Scotland but the same rule applies to Scottish companies under section 112(6) of the Companies Act 1989.

7. Do the rules apply to overseas companies?

A company incorporated outside Great Britain which opens a branch or place of business in Great Britain must be registered and must give similar details to those stated in this chapter. Full details are listed in the Companies House booklet, 'Overseas Companies

[Pinky69]

And the update from the Companies Act 2006:

 

Changes to business stationery rules

As from 1st January 2007 the following applies to –

 

Business Stationery

 

Whether in hard copy, electronic or any other form:

A company must state its name, in legible lettering, on the following -

 

• all the company's business letters, order forms;
  
• all its notices and other official publications;
  
• all bills of exchange, promissory notes, endorsements, cheques and orders for money or goods purporting to be signed by, or on behalf of, the company;
  
• all its bills of parcels, invoices, receipts and letters of credit
  
• on all its websites
  

On all of its business letters, order forms or any of the company’s web sites, the company must show in legible lettering –

 

• its place of registration
  
• registered number
  
• its registered office address
  
• and if it is being wound up, that fact,
  

Whenever an email is used where its paper equivalent would be caught by the stationery requirements then that email is also subject to the requirements. The above also applies to Limited Liability Partnerships.

[lexis200]

Ahh, that'll be why it was dinging with me, because it was more recently updated to include websites which is what we were dealing with.

 

I had to go round making up new pages to go on dozens of sites and it bored me silly, which is why I remembered it being in recent years:rolleyes:

[vint1954]

Sorry AA99 - not giving identifying details until the courts cases are over. There are often guests on here who would love to just know who is taking court action against them and some of the details. I have said I will give a full account once court action is over. At the moment with Bank 2 I am having to give them time to respond to my claim against them prior to court action as that is what a court expects. Only Bank1 cases can go forward at this time. Bank 3 and the DCA cases rae ready but LBAs only recently sent.

 

Vint - the legal sites I have read on company law with regard to stationary have not said companies must give their Reg No.

thanks Pinky

[Harrassed09]

Mammoth thread Pinky et al!

 

Great reading, has taken most of the day!

 

Will keep popping in to see progress!

[Pinky69]

Well, playmates, I have been tweaking again at the preparation for the cases against Bank 4 (no agreement, unlawful DN and rescission), Bank 5 (continued to take money from CCCS after selling the agreement to DCA - theft pure and simple) and the DCA (no agreement or paperwork of any kind, bought the rescinded agreement then entered defaults). I was spurred today to get the final tweaking done as the DCA wrote a load of sheep's purlies in reply to my final letter to them and they have now had their chips. B cheek of them! They threatened to countersue when they have nothing to countersue with! - they stated long ago the alleged debt is unenforceable. A copy has gone to the OFT and the ICO. Not only that but under the Scots Law Prescription and Limitation Act 1973 the account no longer exists - the equivalent of being Statute Barred in England. In Scotland after 5 years the account is completely wiped out.

 

It's hard work doing the legal bit for each case - I have literally been at it for 8 hours and am now enjoying a much needed cup of tea. I am disabled so it isn't easy for me.

 

All done apart from photocopying letters to attach.

 

The local Sheriff, an extremely nice man, will shortly be sick of the sight of me!

 

I know you are all dying to hear the outcomes and details. Well, I will know the return dates for Bank's 2 and 3 cases on Thursday. My holiday got in the way but everything is now ready to go on those two. I promise you a blow by blow account of everything as it happens.

[volvo]

good luck Pinky

 

VOLVO

[alfwithhair]

go kick their arse Pinky

[Pinky69]

Finally got to the court today to lodge Case 1. Pitched it at Summary Cause level -I can handle that and no solicitor's fees. The Clerk of Court looked at it and told me I would have to put my reason why I wanted it heard in the local Sheriff Court in the Description of Claim (Scottish Court, Bank's HQ in England) - no problems there. Minor adjustment.

 

She also said the Sheriff would have to have a look at it to decide if it could be heard under Summary Cause or would have to go to Ordinary Cause. Mmmm. My thoughts on that are that in Ordinary Cause you must be represented by a solicitor. The compensation limitation in Summary Cause is £5000 whereas in ordinary Cause there is no limit. So, if I am forced to go to Ordinary Cause, which I hope to avoid, I will be going for the jugular in compensation.

 

I will have more news for you on this next week. All comments appreciated.

[Pinky69]

Required addendum made! Power to the CAGGERS!

 

 

 

1)The pursuer avers that the proceedings in this cause come under the jurisdiction of this court as per the terms of the Civil Jurisdiction & Judgements Order 2001: “Any proceedings which by virtue of the Article 16(1) (consumer contracts) are brought in the United Kingdom by a consumer on the ground that he is himself domiciled there shall be brought in the courts of the part of the United Kingdom in which he is domiciled.”

[AA99]

[Power to the CAGGERS!

/QUOTE]

 

whistle whistle whistle

[Pinky69]

Well, well, well - it has been an interesting day. I got statements today that I requested from the FOS because Bank 2 didn't send me any in response to my SAR.

 

The bank statements show that on the day they entered the defaults on the two accounts in dispute, they wrote the accounts off and both had zero balances. No wonder they refused to correspond with me or Equifax. In addition the FOS came to their usual conclusion that I probably owed the money when he had evidence that both accounts had been zero balances. In addition to that, the bank sent the statements of someone else interspersed with mine and neither the Adjudicator, the Ombudsman or the representative from the review team who sent me the statements noticed this. So that is the FOS and their findings rubbished completely. I will enjoy writing to the OFT and ICO.

 

Back to the drawing board - thank goodness I left a minor part of the summons out and the Clerk of Court handed it back to me to insert. I have already written to all 3 credit reference agencies to tell them to remove the default entries immediately.

 

Now to go for the jugular. Back to the drawing board.

[Pinky69]

Update. I have now done everything I need to do before formally raising court action. The cases of Bank 2 are now being reviewed again by the credit reference agencies but I am not going to wait forever for their responses - this has dragged on long enough. If I don't get positive responses from them by the end of the month, I am going forward with the prepared cases at court. I've also written to Bank 3 that they have had long enough to reply and a summons will now be lodged at court. The theft case is with their lawyers and I am not waiting forever for them either. I can go ahead too with the DCA. So the last final wait for any responses and I start lodging the cases with a few days between each at court.

[The GodMother]

go get em pinky

[Pinky69]

I will, Godmother. The delays are because I need to give them adequate opportunity to settle out of court and just when i think I have done that, I get another bit of info that needs to be dealt with before I can go ahead. But I will be going ahead, you can be sure of that. It's been a lot of hard work but hopefully worth it.

[Jameson78]

Great thread Pinky

[lisa2393]

Fantastic thread Pinky, really appreciate all the information on here.

 

Anyone able to add any more advice to this please?

 

Many thanks and best of luck Pinky x

[Pinky69]

Thanks Lisa - I am doing my best - Ha! The ICO have awoken - much to my surprise - and want everything Bank 2 sent me, so I am going to be busy again. More delays but at least they are going to be working on it.

[Pinky69]

Have been busy copying all the stuff the ICO. I can let you see the covering letter and it will give you some idea of the case:

 

Thank you for your letter of 16 November 2009.

 

I did not know defaults had been entered by the (bank) on my credit reference reports until 14 April 2009 when I checked the reports.

 

In reply, I enclose the following, adding notes as appropriate:

 

1)A copy of my final statement from the CCCS dated 5 November 2007 showing that one alleged (bank) agreement had a zero balance on 20/05/2003. I do not recognise either of the reference numbers. There is no trace of any other (bank) account on the statement.

 

2)A letter dated 7 January 2008 from (bank worker) indicating they had sent application forms. I did not ask for application forms – I asked for copies of the agreements under Sections 77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

3)Copies of the application forms and alleged Terms and Conditions, which are illegible

 

4)Copy of Default Notice and termination letter for the alleged credit card agreement. The Default Notice is unlawful because it does not give sufficient time for the alleged breach of agreement to be remedied. It is 14 days from the date of SERVICE, deemed in law to be 2 days after the date the Notice was sent if sent by 1st Class Mail and 4 days after the Notice was sent if sent by 2nd Class Mail (Queen’s Bench 1985). All the bank did was add 14 days to the date on the Notice. There are other breaches of the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) regulations 1983 in the Notice. The termination letter was not sent until 24th January 2008. Terminating an agreement after issuing an unlawful Default Notice is unlawful rescission and with the rescission of the agreement all clauses in the agreement are rescinded, including all clauses pertaining to data processing. After 24 January the bank had no lawful right to process my data and doing so incurs damages. Entering defaults on my credit reference reports on 6 May 2008 gave rise to a claim for damages and I will be taking legal action in due course.

 

Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but gives rise to a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

 

 

The defaults were not entered on my credit reference reports until 4 months after the rescission and on the date of entry the rescinded accounts had zero balances. It must be unique to enter defaults on rescinded accounts with no agreements which had zero balances on the date of entry?? I don’t think that conforms to the required industry standard somehow!!

 

5)Copy of the termination Notice pertaining to the alleged loan agreement. No Default Notice was issued prior to this termination Notice and the alleged agreement was therefore rescinded on 16 January 2008. The defaults were not entered on my credit reference reports until almost 5 months after the rescission.

 

6)A Copy of the notepad pertaining to my SAR requests for all the information the bank held on me with regard to both accounts and a copy of a reply from them dated the 4 June 2009 and copy of postal order I sent them. I received copies of the alleged credit agreements and Terms and Conditions and that was all. I asked for more information and received the letter dated 4 June 2009 returning the £10 I had sent for information on the loan agreement.

 

7)Copy of letter from (bank worker) dated 1 June 2009 in which he states they believe they gave sufficient time to remedy the alleged breaches of agreement. They did not and they are either ignorant of the law or were bluffing. He writes that they will continue to pursue the outstanding amounts. I did not know at this time that the alleged accounts had been recscinded – I only learned of the law pertaining to rescission later. I also did not know that by this time the alleged agreements had been charged off and had zero balances because the bank never told me. He also states in his letter that the bank would not reply to any further correspondence and would simply file anything I wrote to them.

 

 

8)Copies of the demands from Moorcroft and Frederickson in relation to the alleged credit card and loan and a copy of a demand from Lewis in relation to the alleged loan. The rescinded agreements were assigned without Notices of Assignment in breach of the Law of Property Act 1925 S136. I included complaints about this as an addendum to the FOS complaint I had made in relation to other matters. The Lewis demand came after the bank told me they would not respond to my correspondence. It wouldn’t have mattered what I had written to them – they weren’t listening to me anyway, at any time.

 

9)Statements showing the charged off alleged accounts. The bank did not send me statements at any time, nor did they send me statements in reply to my SAR requests and I didn’t know that statements even existed until the FOS told me they had seen statements. I asked the FOS for copies of what they had seen when I was preparing the court case. I received the statements from the FOS on the 7 November 2009 and this was the first time I had seen them. I now had the information I needed to make a full complaint to the ICO.

 

10)A letter of complaint to Michael Barnes, the Independent Assessor of the FOS.

I have received an acknowledgement and my complaint will be investigated.

 

I wrote to the CEO (of the bank) in one last attempt to get this settled out of court, as the court will expect me to have done. I have not received an acknowledgement and don’t expect one or a reply.

 

If there is any further information you require, please let me know.

Edited November 20, 2009 by Pinky69

[lisa2393]

Keep up the good work Pinky we are all behind you, go sock it to them!

 

Fighting a couple of battles of my own if anyone has any advice, always appreciated x

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/store-cards/231849-next-how-rude.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/232382-very-confused-link-financial.html

[Pinky69]

Letter from the CEO's Office of Bank 2 today - it is amazing what a bit of pressure can do! It has taken them 7 months but mention of the compensation I intend to claim and a direct approach to the CEO has resulted - at last - in a full investigation. They are really in very deep trouble and all I can do now is sit and wait fro the outcome.

[littlefatbudha]

Hi all, does anyone know of any cases, whre the default notice is defective due to not having creditors name and address on it, and then being terminated.

Keep on at them pinky !!!!!!!!!

[Pinky69]

A DN must have the creditor's name and address on it -Consumer Agreements(Enforcement, Default and Termination) Regulations 1983. If it doesn't and it is terminated, the agreement is unlawfully rescinded.

[welshperson3]

hi just a quick question

i have a suspended posetion order from 2 years ago got on the back of a dodgy DN (no date it says 14 days from date of letter) but never got a letter termanating the account.

 

my question is.

by taking court action i asume the agrement is termanated. if this is right then i wil go for a set aside on the grounds of a faulty DN

 

WP3

Edited November 23, 2009 by welshperson3

[diddydicky]

can't get more terminal than that!

Edited November 23, 2009 by diddydicky