Capquest/Egg/HL - Letter Received and help mucho appreciated.

[tonysnood]

Hi Folks,

 

I've been following this forum for some time and picking bits of knowledge on how to deal with CQ but now need to ask a couple of direct questions.

 

Okay, taking you back to January, I received a SD from CQ (the first communication I ever had from them) relating to an Egg debt from 2000. I immediately went to my local court to see about the whole 'set aside' thing only to be told by a lovely lady there that there was no mention of a court, etc and there was, therefore, nothing they could do. The lady said it appeared to be a threat of one that was cleverly disguised as an actual SD.

 

The following day (a Saturday) I got a call from CQ (no idea how they got my phone number!) who managed to basically threaten me into handing over £200 on my visa debit.

 

Obviously I realised what a silly mistake it was to give someone money who just phoned you up and imemdiately called my bank who said, under the Visa scheme, I had to wait for 30 days to receive documentation justifying this. If I had not received this within 30 days then I could apply to have the money refunded.

 

The following Monday I sent (with help from this forum) the usual 'I do not acknowledge this debt' and 'request the DOA, CCA and statements'. The letter also closed (under advice from a former legal friend of mine) by saying "The monies paid did not and do not amount to an acceptance of the existence of any contract subsisting between myself and any third party in this matter, and was made purely on the basis of the unreasonable demands made by your agent on the telephone. I would advise you that should any legal action be forthcoming that we will be making application to the Court for the supply of your telephone records of this and subsequent telephone conversations.".

 

After 30 days had elapsed, I applied to have the Visa Debit payment refunded. The bank went through their usual process of questioning the transaction with CQ and gave them (I think) 40 days to respond. CQ did not reply to the bank and I received notice from my bank that, in light of this, they would proceed with the refund on the proviso that CQ did not object. The money was refunded a month or so ago after more attempts by the bank to contact CQ.

 

Now, with reference to the DOA and and CCA - last month CQ have managed to send through a) copies of the statements and b) a few pages of terms and conditions. They have still to send either a CCA or DOA.

 

On Friday I received a letter from HL stating:

"We act for CapQuest Debt Recovery Limited, who are agents for CapQuest Investments Limited, who purchased your account from Egg Banking PLC.

 

On the 07 Jan 09 a Statory Demand for bankruptcy under section 268(1) (a) of The Insolvency Act 1986 was sent to you.

 

 

We are informed that you responded to that demand and that on 17 Jan 09 you made an arrangement to repay your account by Weekly instalments of £200.00

 

Furthermore, we are informed that since the issue of the Statury Demand you have paid to our client the sum of £200.00, with the last payment being received on 17 Jan 09.

 

Failure to comply with your arrangement means that our client is now able to present a petition to the court seeking an order that you be declared bankrupt based on your non-compliance with the statutory demand."

 

There follows then the (I guess) fairly standard stuff about 'having a last chance' and how to make payment either by phone or online.

 

So, there are a couple of things here...

 

• They have passed this onto HL without meeting the request for DOA and CCA.
  
• There NEVER was an arrangement to repay £200 a week
  
• The sum of £200 that WAS paid has been challenged and has been refunded due to CQ not defending the challenge.
  

Now it seems I need to write them (CQ) another letter but I don't know what to say. It appears that it is an offence that a) they have not supplied to DOA and the CCA but they are also completely erroenous in the information they gave HL.

 

Any clues on how I should progress? I feel as though by getting the bank to refund the payment I have stirred up a hornet's nest.

 

Thanks you in advance!

 

The Snood.

Edited June 8, 2009 by tonysnood

[twofoot]

To be honest I'd ignore the numbnuts. You can spend a lot of time writing to them cos they play very stupid as you see from their last letter. If you feel you must reply then reply you must, but I'd ignore them. I only ever replied to court proceedings and never to DCA threats. Must admit I had very little agro from anyone and there were lots of DCA's involved and involving 10's of thousands. Give it some thought.

[tonysnood]

Thanks Twofoot but the whole idea of not replying does make me very, very nervous. I'm happy to play hard and make the buggers work but I don't want to get it wrong and put myself in jeopardy if it ever goes to court.

 

It's a bit of a quandary, action or inaction?

 

If I had have known on the 17th Jan about the whole Statute Barred thing then I would have used that and told them where to go but, alas, that door is now firmly closed.

[ODC]

Did you ever admit to Crapquest that you had received an SD from them.

[the_shadow]

Complain to the OFT for duff stat demands being issued.. one is a mistake, but multiple instances of capquest not putting the court details and therefore invalidating the stat demand are on these forums.

 

Stat demand FORM clearly states they **must** fill in pages 1&2 + sections A B C, Section A is the court details.

 

You could also complain as HL state they can issue bankruptcy proceedings when in fact they cant as the stat demand wasnt filled out properly. Therefore this is a breach of the OFT guidelines as they are claiming a legal action that they cannot undertake.

 

S.

Edited June 8, 2009 by the_shadow
added the word "FORM" for clarification

[tonysnood]

Complain to the OFT for duff stat demands being issued.. one is a mistake, but multiple instances of capquest not putting the court details and therefore invalidating the stat demand are on these forums.

 

Stat demand FORM clearly states they **must** fill in pages 1&2 + sections A B C, Section A is the court details.

 

You could also complain as HL state they can issue bankruptcy proceedings when in fact they cant as the stat demand wasnt filled out properly. Therefore this is a breach of the OFT guidelines as they are claiming a legal action that they cannot undertake.

 

S.

 

Thanks for that, need to dig out the 'SD' again and double check it before I go that route.

 

Is it worth me writing a letter in the meantime stating that they have not fulfilled their obligation to comply with the CCA/DOA request and that it is an offence?

 

Whether or not the SD is correct (for the purposes of this question) should that really be the first communication from them? Seems very heavy handed to me.

[the_shadow]

Whether or not the SD is correct (for the purposes of this question) should that really be the first communication from them? Seems very heavy handed to me.

 

I would think the court would take a dim view on the first communication being such a heavy handed threat...

 

I would imagine the insolvency courts have a pre-action protocol or practice that is relative to the courts, i.e. a warning first before issuing a stat demand.. normally companies send a letter advising they are preparing stat demand documents and they will serve them on the person in a set timescale.

 

S.

[the_shadow]

Thanks for that, need to dig out the 'SD' again and double check it before I go that route.

 

Is it worth me writing a letter in the meantime stating that they have not fulfilled their obligation to comply with the CCA/DOA request and that it is an offence?

 

Whether or not the SD is correct (for the purposes of this question) should that really be the first communication from them? Seems very heavy handed to me.

 

If they havent complied with the s78 (did they send anything back at all?) then your defense against a bankruptcy petition is

a) Invalid SD issued, no chance to set aside so complete abuse of due process

b) No CCA sent back, no enforcement action is allowed whilst the s78 isnt responded to.

 

Two showstoppers for them as far as I'm concered.. I suspect they know about a) and its a tactic to scare you whilst ensuring that you cant set-aside and get costs from them.. this is why a complaint needs to be made as whilst you have found CAG others might not and be forced to pay these brutes.

 

S.

[tonysnood]

If they havent complied with the s78 (did they send anything back at all?) then your defense against a bankruptcy petition is

a) Invalid SD issued, no chance to set aside so complete abuse of due process

b) No CCA sent back, no enforcement action is allowed whilst the s78 isnt responded to.

 

Two showstoppers for them as far as I'm concered.. I suspect they know about a) and its a tactic to scare you whilst ensuring that you cant set-aside and get costs from them.. this is why a complaint needs to be made as whilst you have found CAG others might not and be forced to pay these brutes.

 

S.

 

Great stuff. Thanks SO much.

 

So, I'll write a letter informing CQ that they have failed to respond to the CCA request today. When I dig out the paperwork (I'm in the office at the moment) then I can double check and consider whether to follow that with a letter about the SD.

 

It's the OFT I complain to, is it? Is there an accepted protocol for this?

 

Sorry for all the questions!

[tonysnood]

Oh, one more question - should I reference the fact that no payment agreement was reached and that the payment I had made was refunded under the Visa scheme, undefended by CQ?

[the_shadow]

Great stuff. Thanks SO much.

 

So, I'll write a letter informing CQ that they have failed to respond to the CCA request today. When I dig out the paperwork (I'm in the office at the moment) then I can double check and consider whether to follow that with a letter about the SD.

 

It's the OFT I complain to, is it? Is there an accepted protocol for this?

 

Sorry for all the questions!

 

Yep you need to send the account in dispute if not already sent to capquest. I would ignore HL. If the stat demand has nothing in C then its invalid as it doesnt give you the chance to set aside as per your rights under the insolvency act.

 

You could alter the letter to add no agreement to pay has been made and the previous erroneous payment has been reclaimed.

 

The OFT need to receive a letter/email about both HL and Capquest, unfortunately they will only file it against the companies, they dont take on personal complaints but the more complaints they get the better for the next guy or next time so to speak.

 

S.

Edited June 8, 2009 by the_shadow
Added another bit save writing another post :-D

[tonysnood]

Yep you need to send the account in dispute if not already sent to capquest. I would ignore HL. If the stat demand has nothing in C then its invalid as it doesnt give you the chance to set aside as per your rights under the insolvency act.

 

The OFT need to receive a letter/email about both HL and Capquest, unfortunately they will only file it against the companies, they dont take on personal complaints but the more complaints they get the better for the next guy or next time so to speak.

 

S.

 

Obviously the account was put in dispute when I sent the s78/DOA request back in January. They seem to think they have fulfilled their obligation by providing some T+Cs and statements - no DOA, no CCA - so I need to 'strongly' remind them that they cannot enforce while in dispute.

 

Found this in 'tinterweb... Worth adapting for my purpose do you think?

 

Re: my request under s78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Thank you for your recent letter sent to me dated **DATE**, the contents of which are noted. However, the reply received by me does not fulfil your requirements under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The Act demands that I be supplied with a true copy of any properly executed credit agreement that exists in relation to the above account. I may ask for this on demand providing that a fee of £1.00 is paid. This fee was sent with my original letter, dated **DATE**. Upon receipt of the original request the specified account legally entered into disputed status.

 

My request remains outstanding. An application form does not constitute a true copy of a credit agreement and that which you sent doesn't even contain all the prescribed terms and is not 'properly executed'.

 

As you will know, under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a judge is not permitted to make any enforcement order unless the creditor can provide a true signed copy of the original credit agreement. This means that unless you can produce such an agreement, this alleged debt is not enforceable in law.

 

You had until **12 days DATE** to provide me with the true copy I requested. After that date you entered into default of my request. Whilst the account is in dispute, you are not permitted to ask for any payment, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you. Furthermore, whilst the dispute remains, you are not entitled to charge any interest on the account, nor make any further charges to the account. Additionally, you are not entitled to register any information on this account with any credit reference agencies (or any third party).

 

To register information with a credit reference agency, you must have written consent from the data subject to collate and share such information. This consent is given in the form of a signed credit agreement, so until you produce such an agreement, you may not do this.

 

The requirement for consent to share data is a clear requirement of the Data Protection Act 1998. Any such attempts to share my data without my consent will be met with a complaint to the Information Commissioners Office.

 

The time limits, which are laid down in the Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations 1983 are clear. You must supply an executed credit agreement within 12 working days of a proper CCA request. If you fail to comply with a legitimate request the account enters a default situation and if you fail to comply after a further 30 days you commit an offence. You entered into a default on **12 Days DATE** and subsequently committed a criminal offence on **MONTH DATE**.

 

Therefore you have 7 days from receiving this letter to contact me with your intentions to resolve this matter which is now a formal complaint, otherwise your conduct will be reported to the Office of Fair Trading, the Financial Ombudsman and Trading Standards. Any investigation undertaken by them may affect your ability to hold a consumer credit license in the future.

 

Take further note that continued telephone calls after the receipt of a request not to call may constitute a criminal offence under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

 

Communicate in writing and ONLY in writing, your telephone calls will NOT be answered.

 

To sum up, I will not be making any further payments to you until you provide me with the document I have requested. Should you not have any signed credit agreement in relation to this alleged debt, please confirm this in writing to me.

 

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Thanks again for your help!

[the_shadow]

Obviously the account was put in dispute when I sent the s78/DOA request back in January. They seem to think they have fulfilled their obligation by providing some T+Cs and statements - no DOA, no CCA - so I need to 'strongly' remind them that they cannot enforce while in dispute.

 

 

Yep will do as much as any other, add in the bit about the incorrect payment reclaimed so no acknowledgment.

 

Just one thing... this debt from Egg, when was the last payment made... if there were 6 clear years when no payment was made AND you have not admitted the debt in writing at all then it could be stat barred.

 

S.

[tonysnood]

Yep will do as much as any other, add in the bit about the incorrect payment reclaimed so no acknowledgment.

 

Just one thing... this debt from Egg, when was the last payment made... if there were 6 clear years when no payment was made AND you have not admitted the debt in writing at all then it could be stat barred.

 

S.

 

There is 6 clear years. Just (6 years, three months). Only problem is that if it is deemed that the reclaimed payment was an acceptance. How would that sit?

 

I clearly stated, as you can see from my initial post, that the payment was made under duress and it has been successfully reclaimed so would SB still be an option?

[the_shadow]

There is 6 clear years. Just (6 years, three months). Only problem is that if it is deemed that the reclaimed payment was an acceptance. How would that sit?

 

I clearly stated, as you can see from my initial post, that the payment was made under duress and it has been successfully reclaimed so would SB still be an option?

 

Was it 6 years before that payment was made? If not then I think you have restarted the clock and despite you getting the money back I think it would be difficult to prove you havent acknowledged the account/debt in some way.

 

S.

[tonysnood]

Was it 6 years before that payment was made? If not then I think you have restarted the clock and despite you getting the money back I think it would be difficult to prove you havent acknowledged the account/debt in some way.

 

S.

 

Yeah, it would just be inside the 6 years. On the phone at the time I did CLEARLY state that I did not acknowledge the debt and that was a caveat to the payment. I have previously (in the request) asked for audio copies of the conversation, which they have yet to provide.

 

I've added quite a long part to the letter detailing that no debt was acknowledged and 'payment' was under duress and base don their threatening behaviour. I am also referencing the fact that they were given numerous chances to justify the debt and payment, stating that since the amount has been refunded in full, in accordance with the terms of the Visa scheme, no payment has actually been made.

 

That bit might not hold up but it is certain worth a shot as they effectively refused to defend the requests of my bank.

[tonysnood]

Right. Letter all done, runs to three pages and hopefully gives them very little room to manoeuvre given the all the above.

 

Thanks for your help, folks. Keep your fingers crossed for me!

[the_shadow]

Will do... keep us updated.

 

S.

[tonysnood]

Quick update for you all...

 

Received a letter yesterday from CQ stating that they sent the CCA already, along with T+Cs, DOA and statements. I received the statements and a current set of Egg T+Cs but not the rest.

 

Interestingly enough, however, they state that "Regarding statute barred, we have referred to our client and waiting for their response" (their poor English, not mine).

 

It looks like CQ have actually accepted that the reclaimed payment of £200 is considered as never being made int he first place. If this is the case then I'm 99% sure that they will have to find it as SB.

 

Keep those fingers crossed!

[the_shadow]

Quick update for you all...

 

Received a letter yesterday from CQ stating that they sent the CCA already, along with T+Cs, DOA and statements. I received the statements and a current set of Egg T+Cs but not the rest.

 

Interestingly enough, however, they state that "Regarding statute barred, we have referred to our client and waiting for their response" (their poor English, not mine).

 

It looks like CQ have actually accepted that the reclaimed payment of £200 is considered as never being made int he first place. If this is the case then I'm 99% sure that they will have to find it as SB.

 

Keep those fingers crossed!

 

fingers and toes mate :-D

 

S.

[tonysnood]

Hi folks,

 

Quick question - it has now been almost 7 weeks since I had the 'on hold for 4 weeks while we investigate the SB' letter and I have heard nothing.

 

Are they likely to write and say whether or not they accept it is SB or just leave me alone? Is it too soon to chalk this up as a win?

 

Thanks!

[the_shadow]

Hi folks,

 

Quick question - it has now been almost 7 weeks since I had the 'on hold for 4 weeks while we investigate the SB' letter and I have heard nothing.

 

Are they likely to write and say whether or not they accept it is SB or just leave me alone? Is it too soon to chalk this up as a win?

 

Thanks!

 

I'd be surprised if they waste a stamp if they cant claim on it

 

S.

[tonysnood]

I'd be surprised if they waste a stamp if they cant claim on it

 

S.

 

That's what I'm hoping but I hate the not knowing.

 

If they do accept it is SB what happens then? Nothing? Do they fly it back to Egg who then go 'WTF are we supposed to do with this?'?

 

Sorry for all the questions - just wondering if I can finally say they have buggered off.

[the_shadow]

That's what I'm hoping but I hate the not knowing.

 

If they do accept it is SB what happens then? Nothing? Do they fly it back to Egg who then go 'WTF are we supposed to do with this?'?

 

Sorry for all the questions - just wondering if I can finally say they have buggered off.

 

If its stat barred, then the debt exists but they cant enforce it through the courts.

 

S.