Lloyds credit card cca unreadable

[framboise 1]

Going to visit family until Sunday so wont be on line until then. Maybe the next development will be ready to report.

 

I have read a number of threads on here with interest. I am particularly interested in Cymruambyth's case with Lloyds and SC&M (Good luck with it all). It has helped me a great deal in knowing what expect next! Thank you

 

Framboise

[babybear39 2,775]

Anything I can help with **** please shout

[diddydicky 2,570]

May I suggest that you send this- it is a genuine attempt to resolve the dispute without wasting court time

 

they will not respond (well id be surprised if they did) but boy when you show it to the judge will it f**k up any application they make for costs

 

 

 

Re Your Ref Account XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

 

I refer to the above matter and your failure to supply legible documents*(or whatever the alleged failure is )in response to a s78 Consumer Credit Act Request or to provide a true copy of a properly executed credit card agreement.

 

We appear to be at loggerheads in this matter, and clearly you remain in default of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 on this matter.

 

The original properly executed credit card agreement is the document that you would need to produce in support of any county court action against me , and the same document that I would make a court application for you to produce if you failed to respond to such a request under a CPR31.16 prior to my seeking to commence proceedings against yourselves.

 

It would therefore seem to me to be entirely in line with the overriding principles of the CPR for us to make every attempt to settle matters outside the court system .

 

In furtherance of this objective therefore, I would suggest that this matter can be disposed of without further delay by you allowing me to inspect the original properly executed credit card agreement . Thus the matter can a be resolved one way or the other.*

 

Normal convention requires that any such document is inspected in situ- I am prepared to travel a reasonable distance to inspect this document.

 

Alternatively I am prepared to pay the reasonable costs of having this document couriered to the local branch of Barclays Bank*(or wherever)*for me to inspect it there

 

I can think of no valid reason, if it is your sincere desire to have this matter dealt with without further delay, why you should not accede to this request. Since clearly if you satisfy me that you do have a properly executed and enforceable agreement then i can immediately enter into discussions with you with regard to discharging the said debt, which is surely what you are trying to achieve!

 

If however it is the case that you do not possess a properly executed agreement then it would be the better for all concerned for you to admit to this fact now and then we may be able to negotiate a mutually acceptable outcome.

[framboise 1]

Thanks DD I will use this letter and perhaps modify it, in light of...

 

Got a letter this morning (got back this afternoon) from SC&M saying 'sorry on behalf of lloyds for not supplying an agreement....' and they have sent me another copy of the application form (the first page of the one I previously posted and slightly worse in quality!) and several A4 sheets containing terms and conditions for a lloyds visa card (the application form is for a mastercard!) - having read carefully there is no evidence linking the application form to the terms and conditions they have sent me.

 

I will send the letter on Monday.

 

Framboise

[framboise 1]

In the last few days I have realised that as I also have a loan and an overdraft with Lloyds (loan has an enforceable CCA/ overdraft not needed), I am actually making enhanced payments to these accounts whilst the alleged credit card account is in dispute.

 

What I mean by this... On a DMP with CCCS... was paying into all three (CC, loan and OD + some others!)... since ceasing payments due to Lloyds non-compliance with CCA request the budgeted left over income I have spreads amongst the other creditors (genuine ones).

 

I have today written to SC&M to inform them of this as a follow up to Diddy's letter above. I think this will help my case if/when it ends up in court.

 

What I am basically saying is I have stopped paying a debt that is in dispute but I am paying extra into the others whilst Lloyds find and show me an original CCA.

 

Perhaps this could help others in the same boat... hope this makes sense!

 

Framboise

[cymruambyth 1,042]

Hi framboise, have you kept any of the default notices from these accounts? My ltsb loan is an enforceable agreement .... but the dn is not. My SAR when it eventually arrived showed a different date from the notice itself . This apparently means that they can only claim the arrears. Also (yes I do not like LTSB or ****) check for ppi and if they consolidated any ods and loans, I'm waiting to fight this battle, plus check for ay possible charges, LTSB sent me a list but the statements from the SAR showed more. Also don't forget you can ask for statements from the 1990s.

Good luck

[framboise 1]

Hi cymruambyth, what does it mean if and when they have consolidated a loan and overdraft? I know they have definitely done this to me! I have some letters from BLS re the 'consolidated loan and overdraft accounts' and offering me an early settlement figure (!).

 

Still waiting for result of subject access request to find out charges and ppi. I know that I paid into a Scottish Widows payment protection scheme for some time.

 

I wonder who does like Lloyds or ****! or indeed BLS (all the same I hear). I remember before the days that the government bailed them out and someone clearly had a word with them, BLS used to regularly phone me to threaten me and try to trick me into agreeing higher monthly amounts when I clearly couldn't afford it. I remember once when a boy actually said to me 'we're going to take you to court and take everything you own and your wages (!) if you don't increase your payment' he also went on to talk about a group of 'hotshot' solicitors that would make sure of it. He was obviously talking about ****. Of course thanks to reading up on these matters and a lot on this site I now would not dream of even talking to any of this **** crowd.

 

Thanks a lot for the info and good luck to you too:)

[diddydicky 2,570]

In the last few days I have realised that as I also have a loan and an overdraft with Lloyds (loan has an enforceable CCA/ overdraft not needed), I am actually making enhanced payments to these accounts whilst the alleged credit card account is in dispute.

 

What I mean by this... On a DMP with CCCS... was paying into all three (CC, loan and OD + some others!)... since ceasing payments due to Lloyds non-compliance with CCA request the budgeted left over income I have spreads amongst the other creditors (genuine ones).

 

I have today written to SC&M to inform them of this as a follow up to Diddy's letter above. I think this will help my case if/when it ends up in court.

 

What I am basically saying is I have stopped paying a debt that is in dispute but I am paying extra into the others whilst Lloyds find and show me an original CCA.

 

Perhaps this could help others in the same boat... hope this makes sense!

 

Framboise

 

good move- and what you are doing BTW is something akin to "snowballing" which is a very good system of dealing with debts

[cymruambyth 1,042]

Hi cymruambyth, what does it mean if and when they have consolidated a loan and overdraft? I know they have definitely done this to me! I have some letters from BLS re the 'consolidated loan and overdraft accounts' and offering me an early settlement figure (!).

 

I've read another thread on this but am not sure on the implications other than to say it should hopefully work in our favour! In my 'consolidation' over half the small od was in charges. I'm also claiming back ppi on the large loan part. It's gone quiet after a few threats but I'm expecting further problems. I'll keep you posted.

[framboise 1]

haven't disappeared... nothings happened... no reply to sar yet either...

[cymruambyth 1,042]

Have they had their 40 days? If so, you can send a letter reminding them of the law and a copy of your original letter giving a further 7 days. Then you can complain to the ICO whop are snowed under with complaints or take them to court to enforece the production of the documents.

[framboise 1]

Not Quite...

 

The brown envelope has appeared from Northampton!!!

 

Particulars of claim:

 

1. By an agreement in writing & regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the claimants issued to the defendant a credit token, Lloyds Bank Gold Card, for the purpose of the defendant acquiring goods/services on credit.

 

2. The agreement provided that the claimants would furnish the defendant with a monthly statement showing the balance currently due, the minimum payment to be made and the date for payment. If the balance was not paid, then provided the defendant made the minimum payment on or before such date, the remainder of the balance should remain outstanding & the defendant should pay interest upon it per month in accordance with the agreement.

3. In breach of the agreement, the defendant failed to make payment & on 26/10/06 the claimants issued a default notice pursuant to section 87(i) of the consumer credit act 1974

4. On 21/11/06 the claimants did issue a formal demand to the defendant

5. THE CLAIMANTS THEREFORE CLAIM THE BALANCE DUE UNDER THE AGREEMENT: £*****.**

 

So... Acknowledgement of Service so I get my 28 days then I guess?

[cymruambyth 1,042]

Yes

Remember 5 days allowed for service, so if you don't AOS until 5th day you get 5 +14 + 14.

Send CPR 31.14, though don't expect much of a response

[framboise 1]

I have AOS on line and it will be received on Monday by the looks (28.9) claim was dated 23.9.

 

I have also now sent CPR 31.16 letter to SCM

 

And so it begins.... trying to keep it in perspective but it does play on your mind a lot

 

Thanks to everyone so far and especially Cymruambyth for your support.

 

F

[lilly white 620]

So they have issue a claim ok we will put then to strict proof.

 

KEEP US POSTED.

 

YOU ARE NOT ALONE.

 

LILLY WHITE

[lilly white 620]

OK HAVE A READ

 

EDIT TO SUIT.

 

DEFENCE

 

1. It is denied that the matters pleaded in the Particulars of Claim actually disclose any cause of action. In particular:-

 

 

a) It is denied that that the Defendant can have liability to "pay" the Claimant sums of money simply on account of "requests for payment" in relation to a X XXXXXXX - the only matters pleaded.

 

 

No cause of action known to English Law exists on the basis of such "requests for payment" (whether repeated or not).

 

 

 

b) Neither the Claimant being XXXXXXXX can give rise - on its own - in English Law to a liability to the Claimant to pay sums which it appears (on the face of the Particulars, although due to their vagueness it is hard to know) to be being alleged were due

 

 

c) In any event, it is denied that the Defendant has or ever has had liability to pay - whomever that may be - any sum whatsoever.

 

2. It is expressly denied the Defendant is liable to pay any money pursuant to contract or otherwise to the Claimant.

 

3. Without prejudice to the above contentions, the Defendant asserts that in particular, given that the original of the liability is said to be a credit card given by XXXXXXX " (which is a person / entity / company not known to the Defendant), it will be the case, taking into account the amount of the liability, that the transaction and the underlying agreement (if any) between XXXXXXXX and the Claimant would be regulated by the terms of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

4. It is the express contention of the Defendant - again without prejudice to the contention that there is in fact no agreement - that any such agreement as exists does not comply with the Act. It is impossible to plead further in the absence of a pleading by the Claimant as to what the agreement was and what its terms were and the Defendant reserves the right further to plead Particulars of failure to comply in the event that the Claimant amends it Particulars of Claim to allege the agreement.

 

THIS WILL GIVE THEM A LOT TO THINK ABOUT

 

LILLY

 

STOLE FROM MANY TREADS HOWEVER THEY HAVE MADE A CLAIM NOW THEY HAVE TO PROVE IT

[framboise 1]

Thanks Lilly... its certainly giving me something to think about!

[framboise 1]

not sure I quite understand this defence Lilly... can you explain what it means a bit?

 

F

[lilly white 620]

THESE WAS STOLEN FROM ANOTHER TREAD I WILL GIVE A LINK

 

HOWEVER HAVE A READ OF THIS.

 

 

The reason I would suggest defending it as I have set out above is to play them at their own game. If you read threads on here, or you have ever tried to get bank charges back, you will see that many ordinary people try to use the courts for often the first time to get their money back. They issue claims, and they believe that they will be dealt with on a "small claims" court, with a friendly judge, there to help them along, and always thinking at the back of the judges mind that the ordinary person is in the right really.

 

Problem is, it often doesn't work like that. People turn up only to face a barrage of lawyers and barristers, complex legal jargon, and a judge who is not on your side at all!

 

HOWEVER, the other side are EXACTLY THE SAME! Cabot or whoever it is who has claimed against you are not - and have not paid for - a team of top commercial lawyers. They are (hard to accept I know) ordinary people who have ended up working for them, and have thought that the best way to get some money is to get CCJs against people and charging orders. And in the industry (about which I know a thing or two ) they do talk about "getting" CCJs as if they are sweeties you buy from a shop. They don't like to do them if they think they are hard as it is costing them money, and they don't like spending money.

 

When they do issue claims, in the belief that they will "get" a CCJ and a Charging Order (what they are really interested in), they do so using Money Claims Online, and do it in much the same way that a consumer would claim something.

 

There is no lawyer in the land with any real knowledge who would draft a claim like that, so I suspect it has been done by a "recovery manager" or similar, who genuinely beleives that they money is owed, thinks that it is good enough to just put the credit card numebr and the bank name and that the judge will be on their side "because the money is owed". She wants to keep it simple, just like consumers do, and she also thinks that it will be a routine process, through a small claims court, with a friendly judge.

 

So if they turn up (by instructing an "agent" who is usually an unqualified trainee or a person who failed to get a job as a lawyer after university) to the court and face a barrage of lawyers (even if not there in person, but if they know they are behind the scenes), raising obscure points that they don't know how to deal with, then the chances are they will back off - espcially as they appear to be on the back foot already.

 

I think that by pleading various things about the agreement you are in fact (implicitly) admitting you did have an agreement, and you are trying to wriggle out of it. On the other hand I think if you put a defence like I have suggested, they will then have to prove that the agreement exists, what its terms are, etc., which they would be unable to do.

 

I had the same thing - a claim brought against me by someone who bought a debt I was supposed to owe to HSBC for £8k. I didn't even file a defence - I simply applied to have it struck out. In my case they put in their particulars of claim "Phoenix Recoveries as a compartement of Tessra SARL claims money owed £8000 under HSBC Account number ". The fact is, even if they proved that "phoenix reocveries" was a "compartement" of "Tessera SARL" so what? English law gives that exactly zero relevant. Likewise even if they proved that there was money owed under an HSBC Account number, it would have no relevance - to whom is the money owed? Why? What for? How has the figure been calculated? When a person puts in a Particulars of Claim which only has irrelevant points and no relevant points (the relevant points being exactly who the Claimant is, who the Defendant is, what the claim is for, how the claim arose, if a contract what the contract is, how the amount is calculated, and how the claimant has the right to claim the money instead of the bank - i.e. how the debt was assigned) they can get it struck out.

 

Before the hearing date for the strike out, they filed a Notice of Discontinuance, and I got £200 costs, and they confirmed in writing that the matter was closed (i.e. the "debt" if there was a debt, was written off).

[lilly white 620]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/204926-just-back-court.html

[lilly white 620]

So As They Say In The East End Put It On Them.

 

Best Regards Lilly White Have A Good Day

[framboise 1]

thank you Lilly this is very helpful for me to start putting my defence together!

 

I am currently paying BLS (lloyds) a substantial sum per month for debts that they have rolled into one debt reference number... my defence could point to this too perhaps?

 

I remember getting a CCJ a couple of years back from Northern Rock and the advice I got at the time from CCCS was to let them do it!! don't defend it they said... and dont object to a charging order!! Well I did object to a charging order and they didn't get it in the end but I am very glad that I didn't allow them to! (no equity anyway!) This time I am going to defend against this claim and so pleased that this site exists for me to be wise to it.

 

I do want to get my debts sorted out legitimately but I strongly object to these 'creditors' plucking numbers out of the air based on dodgy charges and highly inflated interest rates and changing account numbers, rolling debts into one... this behaviour will never help the likes of me get myself back on the straight and narrow.

 

Thank you again all, got a few weeks to work on defence. I am sure that I will need to bat off all of their SJ games next.

 

Sorry to ramble on here... lots going on in my mind over all this!

[lilly white 620]

ok have used the example and link spelling is not my strong point i do not have time to explain in writhing however i am strong in public.speaking sand to arabs.

 

so when we put a defence together the 1st point is.

 

why have they claimed against you.

 

who are they what are they you must understand the judge does not KNOW you or what you agreed to or not so do not tell them.

USED THE POC

WHAT DOES IT SAY IF THERE ARE NO ACCOUNT NUMBERS HOW DO OU KNOW ITS YOURS WHAT AGREEMENT ETC SO I HOPE YOU GET MY drift.

 

IF YOU PUT A STRONG OPENING THEY WILL THINK LONG AND HARD

 

THE NEXT STAGE ID THE WITNESS STATEMENT THIS IS A STATEMENT YOU WILL MAKE IN COURT WHAT YOU SAY IN COURT

[framboise 1]

Thank you Lilly... I get your drift thank you

 

F

[framboise 1]

Seven days since CPR 31.14 letter and as expected no response. Got proof of postage.

 

Claim dated 23rd Sept, AOS done 28th Sept, My calculations tell me that Monday 26th October is my defence deadline. ?

 

Should I chase them for information (CPR) ? based on Lilly's advice perhaps not necessary if my defence places the burden of proof on them. I notice in some threads people put in a legal request through the court to get the claimant to comply with CPR 31.14 ??

 

Am watching with interest Cymruambyth, Tonka99, Viano, ioio and Hunterandthehunted threads... these things seem to go on forever and it makes realise how far I have left to go!