Rizel23 Vs Barclaycard

[freethemice]

"in order to comply with s78 they must supply a "true copy", in order to comply with the act. In order to produce a "true copy" they MUST be looking at the original when they make the "true copy" for they cannot just assume or guess at what the original "might have looked like or contained."

 

It would be hard for a judge looking at 2 documents to judge wether the bank must have been looking at the original when they made thier "true copy"

 

We both know that the banks are using the s78 response to confuse these issues and make it look like there is a valid agreement when quite often all they possess is a microfiche copy of the front of the agreement or the application form.

Would imagine it wouldn't look good in court if they were pulled up on this but would not imagine it would be fatal for their case. They do seem to get away with alot in the court room with late submission of documents and not meeting court deadlines.

 

The point been here is that rizel is just looking for a good exuse to stop paying so this goes to a debt collector who would be more likely to give a better full and final settlement offer.

Rizel as I understands it doesn't want this to go to court for unenforceability.

Edited September 19, 2009 by freethemice

[diddydicky]

"in order to comply with s78 they must supply a "true copy", in order to comply with the act. In order to produce a "true copy" they MUST be looking at the original when they make the "true copy" for they cannot just assume or guess at what the original "might have looked like or contained."

 

It would be hard for a judge looking at 2 documents to judge wether the bank must have been looking at the original when they made thier "true copy"

 

We both know that the banks are using the s78 response to confuse these issues and make it look like there is a valid agreement when quite often all they possess is a microfiche copy of the front of the agreement or the application form.

Would imagine it wouldn't look good in court if they were pulled up on this but would not imagine it would be fatal for their case. They do seem to get away with alot in the court room with late submission of documents and not meeting court deadlines.

 

The point been here is that rizel is just looking for a good exuse to stop paying so this goes to a debt collector who would be more likely to give a better full and final settlement offer.

Rizel as I understands it doesn't want this to go to court for unenforceability.

 

yes- its all down to presentation and a fair judge!

[rizel23]

thanks guys, would love to avoid court if possible, but with few hours reading would give it a bash if i needed to ;-)

 

Just holding me horses at the moment, only letter i'm sending is to power 2 connect or something which is this;

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/574-letter-when-account-has-been-passed-on-whilst-agreement-request-is-in-dispute

 

i have done all i can with getting Barclaycard getting them to send me a true copy of the original CCA, if they have gone as far as sending me a mirco of the application form why not send the CCA if they have it!

[the_shadow]

Hi Rizel23,

 

If the document/agreement is not signed by them then its not properly executed... sometimes the OC just stamps and dates the form tho and this is sufficient for classing as a signature so be sure to examine the page closely.

 

If its not properly executed then they can apply to the court to have it executed correctly just by signing it at a later date, a court will normally allow this UNLESS....

 

The prescribed terms are missing (and the application/agreement is pre-april2007) in which case the court will be unable to make this an enforceable executed agreement I believe.

 

S.

[JOJO40]

in order to comply with s78 they must supply a "true copy", in order to comply with the act. In order to produce a "true copy" they MUST be looking at the original when they make the "true copy" for they cannot just assume or guess at what the original "might have looked like or contained.

 

Now, if at the court stage they produce a different document which they THEN purport to be the genuine original agreement and it is different from the one which they supplied in response to the s78 request, then by a process of deduction the one they produced in response to s78 was NOT the original and therefore they did not comply with s78 so therefore the proceedings they are undertaking cannot be lawful as they started them whilst in default of the consumer credit act.

 

The statement they made to the effect that what they sent you in response to the s78 request was a true copy then becomes a falsehood (IMO)

 

I may be missing something here but couldn't Rizel23 take Barclaycard to court for not supplying a 'True Copy' of the agreement. We all no that they are not fulfilling their requirement under s78. Surely any Judge in the land would order Barclaycard to properly comply with the CCA 1974 and supply the document in order for Rizel23 to make an informed judgement on his agreement. If they couldn't produce it, the agreement would then become unenforceable and they couldn't then take Rizel23 to court or chase for non payment or produce it at a later date.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Cruisecontrol1

[diddydicky]

yes he could take them to court and demand production of the agreement and if they fail ask the court to rule on it- many people do

 

others may sit back and wait for the creditor to claim and then defend/counterclaim. If the creditor does nothing for 6 years then thats an end to it!

 

its' all accordin!

[rizel23]

Marcers keep calling me.

 

I advised them that a letter had been sent about harresment, and they guy said he will just keep calling regardless!!! Could not believe it!

 

I said i would record each conversation from now on as i advised in letter he said i would need permission of the advisor at the start!

 

Any advise on what to do next? thanks

[MikeBigg]

My advice is not to talk to mercers - don't answer their security questions or say the person they are asking for is not available.

 

It will then go to Calders - who are part of mercers. Probably same people at the same desks. Last time they called I gave them the wrong year of birth - they carried on with the call anyway!

 

Good luck,

 

Mike

[diddydicky]

I may be missing something here but couldn't Rizel23 take Barclaycard to court for not supplying a 'True Copy' of the agreement. We all no that they are not fulfilling their requirement under s78. Surely any Judge in the land would order Barclaycard to properly comply with the CCA 1974 and supply the document in order for Rizel23 to make an informed judgement on his agreement. If they couldn't produce it, the agreement would then become unenforceable and they couldn't then take Rizel23 to court or chase for non payment or produce it at a later date.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Cruisecontrol1

 

not complying with s78 is not an offence so they could not be "brought to book" for that particular failing

[charlie*]

Could it be that Barclay's are not the ultimate keeper in due course of the promissory note?

 

Ask them, stir it up a bit.... even write to the CEO ask him if they are the keeper in due course of your promissory note. You have nothing to fear but fear itself.... False Evidence Appearing Real.

 

Okay, so wassit all about.... think of sub prime mortgage contracts in the US, those mortgage loan agreements were parcelled up into bundles and sold to wealthy investment "funds - investors - other banks - pension funds et al" ...

$billions worth and as the people who bought the houses defaulted when their low start interest mortgages began to achieve full status and interest rates started to rise, they walked away having paid no deposit in the first place - nothing to lose.... with no interest nor capital repayment being paid on those contracts, they became worthless junk..... the investors had been well and truly suckered.... all planned years ago by the international banking cartel.

 

The loan applications are no different - all part of 'paper trading' where the elite and the priviledged grow even richer and more powerful.

 

It's all a game, a revolting ruthless game and if you mention this knowledge to your bank manager he may well ask you to leave the branch and close your account.... it has happened.

 

John Kennedy tried to stop it and was assasinated, so did Lincoln.

 

Quck Ref; Google "Time line of the Rothschilds"... make your bolood boil.

 

There is nothing on this earth nor any law to stop the Prime Minister or the President or any national leader, wherever there is a Central Bank (the Fed - Bank of England etc) from ordering The Treasury (in our case HM Treasury) to issue as much debt free money as is needed to pay off debt, then there'd be no need to pay income tax. Same everywhere wherever there is a central bank and where there is not, the banksters scheme and plot to open them and that is when a nation becomes a nation of slaves... working to pay the interest on the loans from the central banks... all of which are privately owned by a small group of international bankers, mostly in America, but led by one English banker.

 

Wars, inflation, deflation, good times, bad times, all carefully planned.

 

charlie

Edited November 20, 2009 by charlie*

[rizel23]

i seem to be going up in the world with Barclays, now have Calder's sending me letters;

 

 

 

http://i47.tinypic.com/9fti76.jpg

 

do i reply or just ignore?

 

Also i have a second account with Barclays that is in a + balance but they have suspended the use of my card, can they do this as the other account has never had any issues as was from 2008. thanks

[diddydicky]

dear sirs

 

thank you for your letter of XXXX

 

for good orders sake kindly note that the suggestion that i have failed to contact you is refuted, indeed it is your client who is failing to communicate positively in this matter

 

The remaining contents of your letter were within my knowledge but thank you for pointing them out

 

Yours sincerely

 

xxx

[rizel23]

I never replied to there last letter, so got another today!

 

http://i46.tinypic.com/mhzy9k.jpg

 

what should i reply with? I'll of course include the door stop caller letter with same reply to save on me 2nd class postage ;-)

 

thanks all!

[diddydicky]

I never replied to there last letter, so got another today!

 

http://i46.tinypic.com/mhzy9k.jpg

 

what should i reply with? I'll of course include the door stop caller letter with same reply to save on me 2nd class postage ;-)

 

thanks all!

 

ignore this post

[diddydicky]

have you had the default notice that they refer to in their letter?

[rizel23]

Yes i have, this was it;

 

http://i32.tinypic.com/whjxww.jpg

 

vaild i think

 

p.s did'nt have the envople but there was a public bank holiday on 31st August i think

Edited January 5, 2010 by rizel23

[the_shadow]

Yes i have, this was it;

 

http://i32.tinypic.com/whjxww.jpg

 

vaild i think

 

p.s did'nt have the envople but there was a public bank holiday on 31st August i think

 

Valid? I think not.

 

Creditor name and address is required on the default notice, Mercers have issued but Barclays address is not on there. Also rectify date should be 15th Sept to allow 14 clear days.

 

S.

[diddydicky]

Yes i have, this was it;

 

http://i32.tinypic.com/whjxww.jpg

 

vaild i think

 

p.s did'nt have the envople but there was a public bank holiday on 31st August i think

 

not so my friend

 

firstly sent first class on the date of the letter (highly unlikely) 2 days short (due to the BH)

 

5 short if sent 2nd class (as is likely)

 

further the notice is issued by mercers it is not compliant and does not have the name and address of the creditor as required by law

 

time to get a SAR off and also a letter to them acknowleding and accepting their unlwaful termination of the agreement (but dont tell them why)

[diddydicky]

sorry shadow - fingers faster than eyes

[the_shadow]

sorry shadow - fingers faster than eyes

 

Y apologise? The more opinions an OP gets the better to make the decisions that matter to them.

 

The more the merrier I say ;-)

 

S.

[rizel23]

wow!

 

second faulty defualt notice, already had one from M&S!

 

I'm pretty sure on my lst statment from Barclaycard they said account had been terminated, but will check.

 

I have already done a Subject Access Request, but guess i need to do another to get type of postage they used to issue?

 

If i send them a letter to them acknowleding and accepting their unlwaful termination of the agreement they can't issue anoter Defualt Notice can they?

 

Also how much of the arrears can they claim? From the defective default notice or from when i send the a letter accepting there termination?

 

thanks so much for everyones help!

[diddydicky]

the "not so my friend" was directed at rizels "valid i think"

i was apologising for repeating the same advice you gave

 

dick

[the_shadow]

the "not so my friend" was directed at rizels "valid i think"

i was apologising for repeating the same advice you gave

 

dick

 

Re-read post #120 as I stated no apologies are necessary.. I would rather see 100 posts all with the same advice then just one where the OP is left thinking is this the right way to interpret this.

 

 

S.

[rizel23]

hi all, this is Decemeber 2009 Statement saying card has been withdrawn, is that same as account terminated?

 

http://i46.tinypic.com/2r4n1qp.jpg

 

can anyone please advise on how i should proceeded, i'm a bit scared they could issue another Defualt Notice ect, thanks

Edited January 7, 2010 by rizel23

[diddydicky]

no its not a termination

 

its a restriction on your account