Invalid Default Notices

[lookinforinfo]

Their first letter is a killer too. They are saying the money must be credited to their account within 17 days the day after the date on their letter-when the time is based from when you receive their letter.

 

On top of that, as they have said it will take either 4 days or 7 days for the funds to get to their account which gives you much less than the prescribed 14 days -even if it went first class you might have less than 8 days to comply.

[cashins]

On top of that, as they have said it will take either 4 days or 7 days for the funds to get to their account which gives you much less than the prescribed 14 days -even if it went first class you might have less than 8 days to comply.

 

I have a similar NatWest Dn and I took the same view.

 

David

[Worsteve]

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz199/Worsteve/EGGDefaultnotice002mod.jpg

 

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz199/Worsteve/EGGDefaultnotice003mod.jpg

 

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz199/Worsteve/EGGDefaultnotice004mod.jpg

 

Hello everyone

can you give me your opinion on this DN Please? Egg and ARC are now beginning to get active. I think I must get ahead of the game and see if there any issues with these DN's.

 

Many Thanks

[vint1954]

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz199/Worsteve/EGGDefaultnotice002mod.jpg

 

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz199/Worsteve/EGGDefaultnotice003mod.jpg

 

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz199/Worsteve/EGGDefaultnotice004mod.jpg

 

Hello everyone

can you give me your opinion on this DN Please? Egg and ARC are now beginning to get active. I think I must get ahead of the game and see if there any issues with these DN's.

 

Many Thanks

They appear to have given you plenty of time and only requested the arrears.

[nks22]

It looks OK to me. Out of seven DNs received from five different creditors the two issued for my Egg accounts were the only ones that appear to comply and give me the required time to remedy.

[Worsteve]

It looks OK to me. Out of seven DNs received from five different creditors the two issued for my Egg accounts were the only ones that appear to comply and give me the required time to remedy.

 

Thanks for that. I have just sent off my SAR so we will see what comes of that. 40days is what I quoted.....however, a claims management company who are dealing with one of my cards has said that the law states they can have more time due to the backlog the banks and scheisters are having with all the claims against them.........not sure if that is true or not.....

Many Thanks once again

[BeauBrummie]

Thanks for that. I have just sent off my SAR so we will see what comes of that. 40days is what I quoted.....however, a claims management company who are dealing with one of my cards has said that the law states they can have more time due to the backlog the banks and scheisters are having with all the claims against them.........not sure if that is true or not.....

Many Thanks once again

 

Sounds like more Bul.......scheisting to me. 40 days it is!!

 

If the Banks want more time why not operate the systems correctly in the first place - saves loads of time does that;-)

 

Beau

[charlie*]

Good day everybody....

 

The below is a word for word copy of a Default Notice regarding a current account with Abbey.

45 days later I received a letter from a DCA asking for the full amount plus any pending fees (A DIFFERENT AMOUNT BY £22 less) . There was NO letter of Termination from Abbey.

Of this £100 was the original overdraft which I did not ask for. The rest is charges, for unauthorised o/draft.... which they did without telling me and then charging on top of that. (This was a tiny account I kept for small monthly regular outgoings)

 

The question is though, are the Default Notice and the Demand from a DCA enough for rescinding whatever agreement there is.... I did not sign any CCA papers for the account and if I did, they have no copies. I have to confess I got bloody minded withn them over charges and put a claim in for over $500 which of course they now don't have to reimburse.

 

Maybe I should be asking for a complete list of the charges to find out which are the valid ones and which are not.

 

On the other hand the DN looks as though it's all quite wrong anyway, does not offer the protection required by the Act.

 

I also have letters after this date showing overdraft of £100..... they really don't know what they are doing.

 

Appreciate any comments please.

Charlie.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Date XXXXXXXXXX

Our Ref mmmmmmmmm

 

 

IMPORTANT – YOU SHOULD READ THIS CAREFULLY.

 

This is a default notice served under Section 87(1) of the

Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Dear Mr Charlie

Account Number: xxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx

Overdrawn Balance: 456.10 (Plus Interest and Fees)

Overdraft Limit: 0

PROVISION OF AGREEMENT BREACHED: Abbey Account Terms & Conditions

 

NATURE OF BREACH: Management of Account not in accordance with Terms & Conditions.

 

ACTION REQUIRED TO REMEDY; Payment of the overdrawn balance of £456.10 (Plus interest & fees) to us within 14 days of service of this notice.

 

If the action required by this notice is taken before the date shown no further enforcement action will be taken in respect of the breach. If you do not take the action required by this notice, before the date shown then further action may be taken against you.

 

We may take legal proceedings against you for the recovery of this balance or we may refer your account to debt recovery agents.

 

If you are not sure what to do, you should get help as soon as possible. For example you should contact your nearest Citizens Advice Bureau or the Consumer Credit Counselling Service. If you have difficulty in paying this sum owing or taking any other action required by this notice, you may be able to apply to the court to make an order allowing you or any surety more time.

 

In your own interests you are strongly advised to contact the company by telephone on 1234567890 quoting the above reference number if you cannot pay the balance in full.

 

That's all there is, word for word.

[nks22]

The DN would be invalid both because it does not give a specific date by which to remedy and because 'within 14 days' is less than the clear 14 days you should be granted. The general view here seems to be that any demand for full payment is effective termination.

[dasby]

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz199/Worsteve/EGGDefaultnotice002mod.jpg

 

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz199/Worsteve/EGGDefaultnotice003mod.jpg

 

http://i827.photobucket.com/albums/zz199/Worsteve/EGGDefaultnotice004mod.jpg

 

Hello everyone

can you give me your opinion on this DN Please? Egg and ARC are now beginning to get active. I think I must get ahead of the game and see if there any issues with these DN's.

 

Many Thanks

 

They appear to have given you plenty of time and only requested the arrears.

 

An interesting one for Diddydicky to comment on please.

 

IMO the DN is confusing and the stipulations for cheque clearance do not give you sufficient time to remedy the arrears:

 

Date of notice Mon 1st December 2008.

Earliest postal delivery Wed 3rd.

Add the statutory minimum 14 clear days for payment takes you to 17th.

 

Now work back from the remedy date in the DN of 29th December. At first sight you would think that as 29th is 12 days later than 17th they have allowed you lots of extra time to pay. Ignore for the moment that the DN specifies payment by card before 29th. It doesn't specify a date for payment by cheque so I'll be generous and assume that it infers the same date.

 

The DN says payment by cheque will be applied within eight working days, so they need the cheque earlier to allow for it to clear. Go back 8 working days. There is the weekend of 27-28th and before that xmas day and boxing day 25th-26th. That takes you to back to Wed 24th as the 1st working day before 29th.

 

I calculate the eighth working day before 29th as Monday 15th December.

 

That only allows 12 days at best to pay the arrears by cheque. IMO the DN is fatally flawed in this respect.

Edited March 31, 2010 by dasby

[count orlok]

My position is that i am making token payments, not towards the full claimed balance, but against the arears. Even the arears alone will take years to pay off. the full balance would take eons.

[Its WAR]

Hi Charlie,

 

Sounds to me your DN is for a current account. Therefore it can be as useless as any other flawed DN but gives you nothing of value.

[charlie*]

Hi Its War...

 

Not sure what you mean here...

 

... it gives you nothing of value.

 

Do you mean I can't use it?

 

Thanks

[MandM]

An interesting one for Diddydicky to comment on please.

 

IMO the DN is confusing and the stipulations for cheque clearance do not give you sufficient time to remedy the arrears:

 

Date of notice Mon 1st December 2008.

Earliest postal delivery Wed 3rd.

Add the statutory minimum 14 clear days for payment takes you to 17th.

 

Now work back from the remedy date in the DN of 29th December. At first sight you would think that as 29th is 12 days later than 17th they have allowed you lots of extra time to pay. Ignore for the moment that the DN specifies payment by card before 29th. It doesn't specify a date for payment by cheque so I'll be generous and assume that it infers the same date.

 

The DN says payment by cheque will be applied within eight working days, so they need the cheque earlier to allow for it to clear. Go back 8 working days. There is the weekend of 27-28th and before that xmas day and boxing day 25th-26th. That takes you to back to Wed 24th as the 1st working day before 29th.

 

I calculate the eighth working day before 29th as Monday 15th December.

 

That only allows 12 days at best to pay the arrears by cheque. IMO the DN is fatally flawed in this respect.

 

It's not an argument i think you'd win or we could apply the 'cheque' argument to ALL DNs and most would fall short by many days.

 

M

[dasby]

It's not an argument i think you'd win or we could apply the 'cheque' argument to ALL DNs and most would fall short by many days.

M

 

Has it been tested in court?

[charlie*]

bump

[Pinky69]

Hello,

 

Any room in here for the original poster? This thread has certainly taken wings big time!

 

The last time I posted my cases had gone to the ICO. That was over 3 months ago and no replies, just requests for further information. I know that the investgations have started. Their data states that they deal with 75% of cases in 90 days so all my cases have now moved into the 25% that take the longest time. I wrote today to ask them for a progress update and how much longer the investigations will take. They won't be able to answer that but it reminds them that I am still here.

 

Since I posted I found out that one of the cases not only had an unlawfully rescinded agreement but the application form they sent in reply to my original CCA request is a cut and paste forgery. I have complained to the DCA in question, the OFT and of course the ICO. The DCA are under pressure to come up with something in reply so they keep sending letters every 10 days saying "Sorry we have been unable to reply - we hope to be able to answer your complaint in 10 days"! They are between a rock and a hard place because I have said I will have it forensically tested and have reported them to the OFT and ICO for forgery. Squirm sh*ts!

 

Well, that's it for now. Keep smiling CAGers!

[Dotty50]

Lots of room today Pinky, it's the quietest its been for a while. Everyones gone skiiing in the easter snow I guess!

 

Forensics eh! Good one that, will bear that in mine should I get any CCA's!

[middenmess]

Hi Dotty & Pinky

 

This thread from post 716 on [or all of it makes good reading for the Easter weekend] will give you some info on the Forensic aspect.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/191784-shakespeare62-nastybank.html

[Dotty50]

OMG 49 pages!

 

If I start reading that, I will get nothing done for mine this weekend! lol

[ihatemybank]

Hi All,

 

I received a DN which was dated 12th August 2009. The remedy date was 26th August 2009.

 

I calculate that the remedy date should have been 1st September could someone verify this. It was sent 2nd class post.

 

They did not terminate/inform me that they had terminated the agreement until the 19th September 2009.

 

That being the case could they argue with any success that they gave me plenty of time to remedy the breach. This is what they are insisting.

 

Also could I have made things akward by making a payment of £75.00 to them after termination or could I say this is for the arrears on the notice?

[nks22]

It's definitely invalid with those dates and nothing they say can change that. Have you written to accept illicit recission? Should it ever come to court I think you could argue either that the single payment was towards the arrears or that, as a layman, you weren't immediately aware of the legal situation.

[ihatemybank]

nks22 thanks for your prompt response on a sunday!

 

I havent wrote to them yet about this because there have been lots of other issues involved i.e. s 78 request/letter saying they dont have a signed agreement but I think the DN is the best route to go down.

 

Since termination they have added an additional £500 interest to the account. In terms of CRA can I insist that they update the Default date to the date of termination as they appear to believe the agreement is still running depsite their termination letter of 19th Sept 2009.

 

Thanks

 

IHMB

[diddydicky]

no,

 

the DN is invalid and it makes no difference that they then terminated some time later

 

forget the 75 quid unless they raise the issue

 

 

i would write to them with regard to the 500 added and point out that since they unlawfully repudiated the (alleged) agreement and you accepted that unlawful repudiation- there is no agreement remaining on which they can lawfully add interest or charges

 

that gets you around the problem and make sure you keep a copy

[ihatemybank]

Thanks for your help. I've just looked back over my old paper work and I did send them a letter in October saying that they unlawfully terminated and do not have my consent to reinstate the agreement although I didnt sat that "I accept your unlawful repudiation". Should I rely on this or am I best to firm up my position with a more recent letter as the 75 quid was paid after this letter.

 

Invalid DN seems to be worse than unenforcable CCA the only problem is damage to credit reputation.