No Obligation To Supply Copy of Credit Agrrement

[sarahdavenport]

Hello there,

 

I've just had a letter from milords Turnbull Rutherford Solicitors in relation to a debt which was sold to their clients HFO Services (they are actually the same people with the same CEO) and for which I sent a SAR (to HFO).

 

TR's letter loftily informs me that "a recent High Court Judgment held that once a credit agreement has been terminated the obligation to provide a copy of the agreement in accordance with s.78 ceases."

 

Is this correct? If so, what action should I take from here? They clearly cannot produce a copy as I have asked them before, but TR cunningly secured the debt under a court order in 2005 or 2006.

 

My gut feeling is that I should seek to set aside the court order on the grounds that the original debt agreement was invalid as it cannot be produced. But does anyone have any other suggestions?

 

(Incidentally these Turnbull Rutherford people are swine. The original court order was granted in their favour because they WITHELD sending my original N9A papers to the court until after the time allowed, therefore making it appear that I was not mounting a defence. One of the solicitors working there at the time admitted this on the phone subsequently. Surely this malpractice should also count in my favour.)

[lickthewallfatboy]

total crap

 

hit them with this

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/173201-why-you-shouldnt-use.html

[the_shadow]

Hmm sorry but I disagree, I think they are correct, if the agreement is terminated and judgment obtained I dont think they do need to respond to a s78.

 

Plus if they have already obtained an enforcement against you then they are not going to be bothered about not complying with a CCA request anyway, you will still be bound by the judgment to pay.

 

Have you SAR'd the original debt owner? CC firm?

 

S.

[the_shadow]

For the set aside you will need to show a good chance of success in defending the original claim, for that you will need evidence and plenty of it.

 

Not sure about the malpractice side of things but if you can show that the default was invalid or not served correctly, the assignment to HFO was incorrect or that the account had unfair/illegal charges on it which make the default outstanding/arrears amount incorrect. These things will all aid a defence and give good reason for the set-aside.

 

If you can prove that the solicitors abused due process then that could be key also but its proving it.

 

S.

[lickthewallfatboy]

I meant "crap" if they said they didn't have to prodice the agreement ever.....didn't make myself too clear there!That's why the need to use CPR is mentioned

 

if there is no agreement,surely the judgement is invalid

 

if applying for a set aside on those grounds,I would have thought that they would have to provide the agreement on that basis

 

IMHO of course