Forged signature on termination letter

[Pinky69]

I have just been checking the termination notice for a case I am taking to court next week. I have just noticed today it has been typed out and the first paragraph misses out a crucial word " sum".

 

The letter states "The said includes interest......"

 

It should read " The said sum includes interest ......."

 

But even more gobsmacking is this - it has a forged signature. I have letters from the sender all with the same signature but the signature on this termination notice is typed on using a fancy font and is nothing like the supposed sender's signature.

 

They didn't send me a Default Notice so my thinking for my case is that they terminated an account without a DN (already fleshed out as part of my case) AND the termination notice was a fraudulent document.

 

All views appreciated.

[vint1954]

I have just been checking the termination notice for a case I am taking to court next week. I have just noticed today it has been typed out and the first paragraph misses out a crucial word " sum".

 

The letter states "The said includes interest......"

 

It should read " The said sum includes interest ......."

 

But even more gobsmacking is this - it has a forged signature. I have letters from the sender all with the same signature but the signature on this termination notice is typed on using a fancy font and is nothing like the supposed sender's signature.

 

They didn't send me a Default Notice so my thinking for my case is that they terminated an account without a DN (already fleshed out as part of my case) AND the termination notice was a fraudulent document.

 

All views appreciated.

 

Obviously no need to tell you Pinky, but No DN then account has been recinded unlawfully.

 

Was there any mention of a DN in SAR.

 

Save the forged sig for Court.

[Pinky69]

No - no DN as part of the SAR and they stated in an accompanying letter that what they sent (an application form and a couple of letters) is all they have. I have asked them 3 times for a copy of the DN - nothing. That part of the case is already prepared. Why do you say keep the false document for court?

[vint1954]

No - no DN as part of the SAR and they stated in an accompanying letter that what they sent (an application form and a couple of letters) is all they have. I have asked them 3 times for a copy of the DN - nothing. That part of the case is already prepared. Why do you say keep the false document for court?

 

Only that by the time you get to court, they cannot rectify by sending another.

[Pinky69]

Thank you.

[angry cat]

Err!

How can they rectify the DN, if the account has been Terminated?

 

AC

[vint1954]

Err!

How can they rectify the DN, if the account has been Terminated?

 

AC

 

I Think it was the TN that had a forged signature. There was no DN.

[angry cat]

I Think it was the TN that had a forged signature. There was no DN.

 

So?

 

Cant see how thay can retify, if the account has been terminated;

contract has ended!

 

AC

[vint1954]

So?

 

Cant see how thay can retify, if the account has been terminated;

contract has ended!

 

AC

 

Maybe just back to my origonal thought then. Save it for a rainy day.

[angry cat]

A Creditor can Rectify an inneffective DN when the account has not been terminated and then go back; re-issue the DN and Terminated the agreement.

 

But, it is a different matter when the account has been Terminated.

 

AC

[vint1954]

A Creditor can Rectify an inneffective DN when the account has not been terminated and then go back; re-issue the DN and Terminated the agreement.

 

But, it is a different matter when the account has been Terminated.

 

AC

 

Thanks AC,

 

Is it only a Termination Notice that is accepted as final termination, or does the law recognise additional forms of termination, such as demanding full payment?

 

Vint

[Pinky69]

The account was terminated without a DN, so it is rescinded - it no longer exists. My post was not about that but about the legal significance of a TN that had a forged signature on it. I want to be able to argue that not only did they terminate the account without a DN but the termination notice itself had a forged signature and ......... what? It is further evidence of their total disregard of the law?? How can I use this to my advantage.

[babybear39]

Makes you wonder why they simply didn't pp the signature

[Pinky69]

My thoughts too, Babybear. It seems to be such a stupid thing to have done.

[angry cat]

They do it!

Had it done to me.

 

AC

[babybear39]

Some idiot taught DCAs how to use photoshop

[I've got no money]

 

But even more gobsmacking is this - it has a forged signature. I have letters from the sender all with the same signature but the signature on this termination notice is typed on using a fancy font and is nothing like the supposed sender's signature.

.

 

IMO the signature on the TN is irrelevant - I'm not aware of anything in the regs which says that a the TN must be hand signed - I can't see a Judge reading much into it - lets face it when we write to them we don't hand sign our letters - the only issue would be if the creditor denied sending the letter

 

The lack of DN is a much bigger issue

[Pinky69]

This is a mainstream bank. The name is the name of the head of the collections department. Say her name is Jane Smith. It is signed "Jane Smith" but is not her signature. It is in copperplate typing and looks nothing like her signature. Still trying to find out how I can use this to my legal advantage.

[I've got no money]

This is a mainstream bank. The name is the name of the head of the collections department. Say her name is Jane Smith. It is signed "Jane Smith" but is not her signature. It is in copperplate typing and looks nothing like her signature. Still trying to find out how I can use this to my legal advantage.

 

I don't think that you can use it to your advantage - why should the typed signature resemble the actual signature...

 

IMHO it is a point that isn't going anywhere - IMO you need to concentrate on your best points - if you raise it I can't see you getting a lot of sympathy from the Judge

[Pinky69]

Because the signature is not the usual signature of the sender and why would she suddenly type in a signature when every signature I received before that was in manuscript? - she is not a typist. There is no proof of any kind that this letter was authorised by anyone from the bank so it looks as if they have terminated without a DN and without a Termination Notice too.

[angry cat]

Sorry Pinky, I also do not think that this will work either, since it would have been clear to which account the Notice referred.

 

All that is required by paragraph 1 of Scedule 2 of the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 is a;

"description of the agreement sufficient to identify it"

 

Please note though, if they Terminated the agreement without serving a Default Notice, that Termination will be inneffective.

 

AC

[I've got no money]

Because the signature is not the usual signature of the sender and why would she suddenly type in a signature when every signature I received before that was in manuscript? - she is not a typist. There is no proof of any kind that this letter was authorised by anyone from the bank so it looks as if they have terminated without a DN and without a Termination Notice too.

 

I would suggest that it is in your interest not to question the TN - it may be that their IT Department has now set their system up so that it produces documents with typed signatures

[volvodriver]

Because the signature is not the usual signature of the sender and why would she suddenly type in a signature when every signature I received before that was in manuscript? - she is not a typist. There is no proof of any kind that this letter was authorised by anyone from the bank so it looks as if they have terminated without a DN and without a Termination Notice too.

 

Pinky

 

I would not like to argue "looks as if" in a junior school debate, let alone a court of law.

 

Did they or did they not?

 

Can you prove or disprove it?

 

If yes or no, does it help your case?

 

This intended to be constructive not negative.

 

Vdr

[Pinky69]

Well, thanks for all your opinions. By the way Angrycat, they HAVE terminated without a DN - that's not ineffective termination, that's unlawful rescission, a breach of CCA 1974 87 (1) - they cannot terminate without serving a DN first.

[twofoot]

Never ceases to amaze me how dumb these money grabbers are. Good thing is they have come up against someone with something between the ears, apart from sawdust. Hope they turn up and shrival.