Jump to content


cupcake68

cupcake68 Vs M and S 92

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2405 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Am I right or am I still dumb?
Yes you're right. ;)

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

great thread cupcake68

 

well done cerberusalert

 

essexboy:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers guys!

 

Finally I think I'm getting it!!!!!

 

So.....

 

Do I reply or ignore for now?

 

Thanks

 

Cupcake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Send them this;

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

This account is in Dispute .

 

On xx/xx/2009 I wrote to xxxxxxxxx requesting that xxxxxxx supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account.

In response to this request I was supplied a mere application form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain any of the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553 for the definition of what is required. Suffice to say none of the terms are present in the document

 

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

 

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

 

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.

 

In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I refer to page 5 of the guidance which states;

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment.

 

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 and the default notice is non compliant, it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for your client to write the 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

 

I respectfully request a response to this letter in 14 days

 

 

I trust this out lines the situation

Print name do not sign


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok sent m and s letter as advised.

 

Today received a letter from Collect Direct.

 

Do I acknowledge it? Send bemused letter? Or wait for m and s reply?

 

Thanks

 

Cupcake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Send the bemused letter. ;)


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

 

A reply from m and s ....

 

"Please note that the application and agreement form are one and the same. Above your signature on the form returned to us, a statement reads "This is a credit agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Sign it only if you want to be bound by it's terms"

 

The agreement is a single document in more than one piece. However, even if it were not so, section 61(1)(b) of the consumer credit act 1974 requires that the signed document embody all the terms of the agreement, other than implied terms.

 

Section 198(4) of the Act provides that a document embodies terms if they are set out in that document or are in another document referred to in it. either way, the agreement you signed conformed to the requirements of the Act.

 

M&S money believe that your agreements are legally enforceable and as such refute your allegations."

 

What do I say to that?

 

Thanks in advance

 

Cupcake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore them, you need them to send you a termination notice. ;)


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received an URGENT NOTICE in red(!!) today from Collect Direct.

 

Not paying within the next 7 days could result in "The Bailiff visiting your home" etc etc.

 

Do I bother to reply?

 

Cupcake

Edited by cupcake68

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not paying within the next 7 days could result in "The Bailiff visiting your home" etc etc.
They would have needed to have obtained a CCJ first & you would have needed to have defaulted on that. Even then they would need to apply to the court for permission to take enforcement. :rolleyes:

 

Ignore the numpties. ;)


Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Cerberusalert.

 

I am aware of that now but a year ago that letter through the post would have put me in hospital!!

 

I only wish we could let all the people that are currently living under their threats that they cannot do this.

 

Thanks as always for the great advice - where would I be without this site?

 

I'll save my postage!

 

Cupcake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

 

Today i have received an "INVESTIGATION WARNING"

 

"Unless payment is received within 5 days from the date of this letter (!6th December!!) instructions may be passed to a local private investigator to make all necessary enquiries prior to issuing proceedings in the County Court for you to be Orally Examined under oath"

 

(Why would they want to see my teeth:rolleyes:)

 

"We may also make a search of H M Land Registry with a view to placing a CHARGING ORDER on your property and existing charges may also be informed of the further charge"

 

Do I reply?

 

Thanks

 

CC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't reply.......I think you've spent enough on stamps. ;)

 

Unfortunately, you cannot stop anyone searching through the Land Registry though.


 

Help us to keep on helping.

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums.

This site is run solely on donations.

 

You can make a donation

HERE. Thank you.

 

Any advice & opinions given by supasnooper are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability.

Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks SS

 

I assume that costs them money too!! They should have asked I would have told them I was a property owner!

 

I'll ignore and await their next move.

 

Merry Christmas

 

CC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Folks!

 

This account has apparently been sold to Sigma and I have received a letter today saying as I have failed to make payment they are going to issue court proceedings.

 

I have another M&S/Sigma account that they tried to issue court proceedings on which was a reserve account and their claim was only for costs - they seem to have gone away since I filed my defence.

 

I was just wondering if things have changed with these accounts. ie this was a store card that they changed to a credit card and I'm pretty sure it was decided some time ago that they should never have done this without signed agreements.

 

Is this still the case or have things moved on?

 

I don't know whether I should write back at this stage to avoid the hassle of dealing with a court claim or if I should just wait and deal with it if/when it comes along?

 

Thanks guys

 

CC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

 

How is everyone?

 

Things have changed so much with these threads now I no longer know if the information is even relevant!

 

Can anyone please tell me if the advice given on here would still stand today?

 

ie agreement doesn't have the prescribed terms and the default notice was faulty so once they terminate they have shot themselves in the foot.

 

The account has been sold on and the new owners are trying to take me to court (not sure what they think they are going to get from me - v low income and no equity!) but I find it very difficult to keep up with the changes that have gone. Every thread I read gives different advice!

 

Thanks for reading this

 

CC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...