New Halifax CCA, possible ramifications for other accounts and products?

[CAPITALpunishment]

Hi All,

 

I have just received Halifax's interpretation of their CCA obligations. Copies available here Index of /halifax/ also included was a further 10 pages of Terms & Conditions dated 01/10/2008 which are similar but with differing APR figures and suchlike (I haven't scanned this document as yet but if it's relevant I will do so).

 

Firstly, could someone run an eye over what they sent and opinonate as to it's enforceability, I would be most grateful as they are issuing me with Default Letters like confetti and have terminated the credit agreement.

 

Secondly, I have other dealings with Halifax, my mortgage is with them. I have been battling for months trying to get them to make the repayments since being made redundant and I pay them £23+ a month for something they laughably call a Total Mortgage Protection Plan. My question, does anybody know if taking my consumer sword to one head of the beast will have ramifications with my other dealings? They have charged me £70 already for 3 letters during this period and refuse to refund all but one of them.

 

All help and comments gratefully received,

 

CAPITALpunishment

[djc]

CAPITAL punishment

I think it is true to state that almost all banking institutions are in total disarray and are clutching at anything within there little safe depository holding area that bears some resemblance to an original created credit agreement. unfortunately they have either lost, destroyed or copied inferior prints that are unreadable.consequently the majority of cca's are not available.Which makes them unenforceable through litigation. (one of our legal experts may well shoot down this view).

from my viewing of your credit card cca it is total rubbish and fails in 99% of terms and conditions.IT is not even an agreement.

from my own litigation with these credit cards they are fatally floored in a large number of arrears.

concerning your potential liabilities with the halifax. if you have an account ie savings or current account, arrange to take out and transfer to a banking institution that is not merged in any format with the halifax, or you could lose it for paying any debt owed or otherwise.

 

reference the insurance total mortgage protection plan. not familiar with this. sounds fantastic but is it any good.

 

BY the way capital punishment has been abolished in this country for a large number of years now unless you know differently ?

 

djc

[djc]

CP

what is the date you took out your credit card

 

djc

[CAPITALpunishment]

Hi djc,

 

Not sure when the credit card started but would imagine that since the T&C's they sent were from 05/2005 it was about then. I have no savings or current accounts with Halifax and I can't see how they can use my mortgage against me, at least until it is up for renewal. I was just primarerly concerned that they could use it as a reason not to honour the TMPP.

 

I have just yesterday heard that the Halifax TMPP are about to make a payment to cover my mortgage so even though they've dragged their feet for 3 months it will turn out to be £23 a month well spent.

 

I use a basic Co-op current account now and have x2 old Barclays accounts that are in the red and I'm about to SAR for charges that should more than cancel out the balances.

 

As to CAPITALpunishment I'm reinstigating it it was my attempt at being witty as my primary credit card battle is with the hapless CrapitalOne disorganisation. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/214698-capitalpunishment-capitalone-cca.html?highlight=CAPITALpunishment

 

Thanks for your comments,

 

CAPITALpunishment

[djc]

Capitl punishment

my latest insight on credit card charges claims is that all claims management companies and solicitors practicing in consumer litigation are holding back from issuing any further letter of claims until an appeal due to be heard in october has been heard. yo may be in for a bit of await so be carefull.i understand that it concerns how credit card companies applied interest charges onto fees etc... if the banks lose this one they will really be in trouble

 

djc

[ejleigh68]

Just recived something similar from Halidiots, I only CCA'd them cos I think I am owed refunds on PPI, if this sort of supposed credit agreement is the best they have on file dont think they will be seeing any more money from me. Maybe I should also mention that I am now a share holder (as are all Caggers) in their bank since they managed to loose all those billions, or do you think they might get a tad upset ...

[djc]

ejleigh68

sorry for not responding but been journeying to hospital and consequently been tied up.

are you going to push on with your claim.

i understand that claiming ppi is a seperate claim from credit card unenforceable.

reference your new aquired wealth of banks share portfolio. i recommend that you hold on to them.

 

djc

[ejleigh68]

djc sorry to hear that hope you are better now or on the mend. I was going to push on with my claim but they are unable to provide my original agreement suprise suprise so they are getting nothing back at all now well its going to save me £11k thats I owed them.....

As for the last part lol I was joking as the Halifax is now mostly owned by the taxpayers as in us .... that was what I meant I am sure if you put that in your corespondance it would really upset them ...

[vint1954]

Hi All,

 

I have just received Halifax's interpretation of their CCA obligations. Copies available here Index of /halifax/ also included was a further 10 pages of Terms & Conditions dated 01/10/2008 which are similar but with differing APR figures and suchlike (I haven't scanned this document as yet but if it's relevant I will do so).

 

Firstly, could someone run an eye over what they sent and opinonate as to it's enforceability, I would be most grateful as they are issuing me with Default Letters like confetti and have terminated the credit agreement.

 

Secondly, I have other dealings with Halifax, my mortgage is with them. I have been battling for months trying to get them to make the repayments since being made redundant and I pay them £23+ a month for something they laughably call a Total Mortgage Protection Plan. My question, does anybody know if taking my consumer sword to one head of the beast will have ramifications with my other dealings? They have charged me £70 already for 3 letters during this period and refuse to refund all but one of them.

 

All help and comments gratefully received,

 

CAPITALpunishment

What they have supplied you is not a true copy of an executed agreement. An executable agreement has to have the prescribed terms within the four corners of the signature document. If I sent you that document asking you for £10k, would you pay me?

 

What is a true copy:

In a recent letter from the enforcement department of the OFT, the text below was quoted, explaining what is required.

“The copy of the executed agreement need not be an exact copy but it must be a ‘true copy’ and not some reconstruction of what the original might have been and it must contain the same terms as the original. Where the terms have been varied as provided for within the agreement, the copy of the original agreement must be accompanied by a document setting out the current terms, as varied. Certain details may be omitted from the original agreement eg the signature but the debtor must be in no doubt as to the true nature of his obligations under the loan.

 

Should no original agreement be in existence it is very hard to say that the copy the creditor offers to the debtor is, in fact, a true copy as there would be no original with which to compare it. In our view the onus of proof would be on the creditor to show that the copy is a true one and where none existed he may have difficulty discharging this. Neither should creditors suggest that a consumer has signed a credit agreement where they are unable to provide evidence to support this — to do so is likely to be a misleading action under Regulation 5 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (the CPRs) and would also constitute an unfair or improper business practice.”

 

I also refer you to the information below.

1. A valid credit agreement must contain certain terms within the signature document (s.60(1)(2) CCA 1974). These core terms are the credit limit, repayment terms and the rate of interest (SI 1983/1553 (6 Signing of agreement) which states that the prescribed terms must be within the signature document. (Column 2 schedule 6). s.61(1)(a) states the agreement must contain all the prescribed terms and be signed by both the debtor and on behalf of the creditor.

 

 

2. Further, s.127(3) CCA 1974 makes the account unenforceable if it is not in the proper form and content or improperly executed.

 

In Wilson and another v Hurstanger Ltd (2007) it was stated “In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties … and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under s.61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127(3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement”.

 

2. The need for prescribed terms to be contained in the credit agreement is confirmed by the Author of the CCA1974 act, I quote ““As the draftsman of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 I would like to thank Dr Richard Lawson for his interesting and well-argued article (30 August 2003) on Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2003] UKHL 40, [2003] 4 All ER 97.

 

Dr Lawson may be interested to know that I included the provision in question (section 127(3)) entirely on my own initiative. It seemed right to me that if the creditor company couldn’t be bothered to ensure that all the prescribed particulars were accurately included in the credit agreement it deserved to find it unenforceable, and that the court should not have power to relieve it from this penalty. Nobody queried this, and it went through Parliament without debate. I’m glad the House of Lords has now vindicated my reasoning and confirmed that nobody’s human rights were infringed.” - 167 Justice of the Peace (2003) 773.”