Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

1stCredit CPR31.16 non compliance and a default


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5144 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

After months of helping frineds sort out their financial affairs I have decided to try and sort out a couple of my own, one of which relates to an account I held with Citicard.

 

I had a small debt with Citicards which was sold to 1stCredit mid last year after I stopped paying my account as Citi were unable to when requested provide a copy of the credit agreement. The account was sold to 1stCredit July 2008 who have been trying to collect it ever since. On numerous occasions I have requested 1stCredit produce a copy of the credit agreement which they have failed to do. I then requested a copy citing CPR31.16, their response was “we have requested a copy of the Credit Agreement from out client Citicards and your account has been placed on hold”. As 1stCredit have been unable to comply with my request I insisted that they cease processing my data and remove the default. They refused.

 

After 4-6 weeks of inactivity from 1stCredit I reminded them of their responsibilities under CPR31.16 and that if they did not comply I would commence litigation against them.

 

This is there response.

1stcprletter.jpg?t=1249392592

 

Here is the situation I find myself in. I am of the opinon that 1stCredit does not have a correctly executed credit agreement as they have failed to produce a copy when requested. 1stCredit, or Citicard I don’t know which did produce an Authorisation Form but this did not contain any of the prescribed terms as defined by the act.

 

It is obvious 1stCredit are not going to admit they do not have a copy of the credit agreement, nor are they going to remove the default they have lodged against me so as i see it the only way to resolve this is to obtain a court order forcing them to disclose what they do have.

Edited by stroke a badger
fingers!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Stroke,

 

The position as I understand it, is that a creditor is unable to enforce an agreement whilst it is in default of a request made under Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 77/78; that is, a request made during the currency of the agreement. If the request was made after termination of the agreement then section 77/78 would not operate. They are also of course, unable to enforce the agreement once the limitation period has expired.

 

It would appear Citi and 1st Credit's reluctance to pursue the claim is rooted in their inability to to produce the relevant agreement. That would appear to be an advantage to you.

 

Whereas a prospective litigant may make application to the court for disclosure in the circumstances set out at CPR 31.16, I'm not yet clear why you would want to do that. Presumably the litigation you threaten is for an award of damages for the wrongful publication of information damaging to your credit reputation. I'm not clear how having the agreement assists in establishing your claim to damages. On the contrtry, doesn't the creditor by having the agreement to hand, assist them in overcoming the restraints of section 77/78 and generally pursuing you in a way in which they would be unable to if they did not have the agreement to hand?

 

x20

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers x20,

 

My intention is to force 1stCredit to admit to not having a copy of the credit agreement, once i have this i will as far as i see it, be in a better position to get the default removed.

 

I'm not going to pursue 1stCredit for damages just the removal of the default.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1st Credit have admitted to not having a copy of the credit agreement on file, however they have requested a copy from Citi, who have yet to produce a documented that satisfies s127(3) of the CCA.

 

So shouldnt you challenge the CRA's to remove the default taken over by 1st Credit on the basis they have no agreement to back this up?

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SAB youre not going to get them to admit this. They are in default of your request so far, so they cant ( in theory) issue a claim against you. I know you probably want to kick their respective Ar*ses, but IMHO youd be better off waiting til they actually tried a court claim, then CPR them. Have you thought about a CCA direct to citicard, to cut out the BS with the crudites?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you thought about a CCA direct to citicard, to cut out the BS with the crudites?

 

That is what got me in to the position i am in. I requested a copy of the credit agreement from Citicard while the account was still open but all i received was the standard "s78 of the CCA does not apply to Citicards" statement. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK So they have defaulted then, let them know that they are in default and no debt is acknowledged, then leave the ball in their court, you should be able to put a notation on your cred file to show the state of play

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

**Update** 1st Credit have provided current T&C's and a unsigned agreement. I have contacted Experian and requested that a notice of correction be applied to me credit file as the account is in dispute. 1st Credit have been "Monitoring my credit file" and can offer me a reduced settlement figure if I contact then before the 29th Jan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

**Update** 1st Credit have provided current T&C's and a unsigned agreement. I have contacted Experian and requested that a notice of correction be applied to me credit file as the account is in dispute. 1st Credit have been "Monitoring my credit file" and can offer me a reduced settlement figure if I contact then before the 29th Jan.

 

After the recent rulings, the requirements of s78 responses have been watered down but sending a blank agreement and t&c still doesnt match what the OFT say is a valid s77/78 request.

 

As to the offer... if they cant put it to writing then imo its just a ruse to get you to call.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

just like the text message I received today "1st Credit will match any payment of up to 30% of your balance that you make in addition to your normal amount. This offer expires 30/01/10.

 

On a side note. The number they sent the text to is a PAYG number in an old phone kept in the car in case of emergencies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

**Update***

 

Rachel, Rachel Rachel. What have you done!

 

So today I receive this lovely letter from dear Rachel at 1stCredit in relation to what I only only assume was to a CPR 31.16 request made a couple of months ago which they have already replied to. The generosity of 1stCredit nows no bounds as they have been kind enough to provide two, yes two credit agreements, one for a citi card account March 2004 and the other for a Citi/Bmibaby Card for 2008. :lol:

 

The T&C's and APR are different in each and there and my signature is nowhere to be seen. Thanks Rachel :D

 

1stCredit.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Same old Citi shinanigans.

 

Whilst they are allowed to exclude the signature, signature box and signature date from the "executed agreement" under the regulations, what they are not allowed to do is substitute it for an entirely different document titled "Terms & Conditions" or retitled "Agreement". And this has always been our argument.

 

The majority of Terms & Conditions are titled "this is a consumer credit agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974". That said the two are very different.

 

The legislation also specifically indicates that under s78(1) Consumer Credit Act you are reqeuesting a copy of the "executed agreement", executed in legalese meaning signed.

 

Whilst the Terms & Conditions may contain all the prescribed terms and be legally compliant, that is irrelevant as the regulations state that the prescribed terms need to be embodied in the "executed agreement" itself.

 

Now I know that some courts have accepted copies of the original T&C as fulfilling s78(1) CCA, but this has not always been the case.

 

The fact is that you probably wish to check whether your "executed agreement" is properly executed, in as much that it contains all the prescribed terms. The could have provided you with a copy of the exact text of that "executed agreement", or a copy minus your signature but you simply can't check it on a copy of Terms & Conditions headed agreement.

 

I personally would continue with a CPR31.16 request, as on the basis of that letter you received they are threatening court action - you'd have to specifically ask to view the "original executed agreement". It may cost you a little bit but I can point you in the right direction if you need help on how to do it.

 

If 1st Credit Ltd have been assigned the account, then they should be in possession of the original if they have any sense. Plus court action would be interesting, in as much as you could argue whether the assignment is invalid - we have it in writing that Citi don't produce "Notice Of Assignments" when they sells accounts, which would explain why 1st Credit fake them (multiple problems in the NOA I received). The law states that for the assignment to be proper, the assignor (original creditor) has to notify the debtor.

 

To obtain an enforcement order against you they would require the original, or at least a provable copy of the original "executed agreement" with your signature, taking you to court on the basis of T&C is somewhat laughable.

 

Hope this is of help.

Edited by Enron

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gonna PM you with details.

Advice offered by ENRON is without prejudice and is for your judgement as to whether to take it. You should seek the assistance or hire of a solicitor or other paid professional if in doubt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...