Fishman123 vs barclaycard ex MSDW

[fishman123]

Doesn't look like a cut and paste, here it is.

Edited July 13, 2013 by fishman123

[Desperate Daniella]

This is in breach of the illegible documents stuff which I will have to look up for you, or someone else will supply.

 

I can't read it at all. However this is the bog standard application form, which does have some variations, and they say the other stuff was on the back, but it looks like a cut and paste to me. Can you read any of it?

 

The very fact that they have reduced it so much it is illegible speaks for itself.

[Desperate Daniella]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?195977-Chris-v-Morgan-Stanley-(urgent-help-Please)

 

Sorry if I have already sent this link. Does your front look like this? I can see the back doesn't, but I have seen that back before in several places and quite often the boxes don't quite line up so you can see it's a cut and paste. I was on loads of MSDW threads but many of them have been quiet and I can't remember what was where, so I am looking through my subscribed threads. I'll post more links when I find them so you can do the comparisons.

 

But the main point you have here is the illegibility.

[Desperate Daniella]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?260808-Hatesdebt-v-Barclaycard-(ex-MSDW)

 

And there's this one.

[slick132]

Hi Fishy,

 

That could hardly look any MORE of a cut and paste job to me. It looks like someone has taken a copy from the Microfiche and then typed the stuff on to the bottom of the 2nd page.

 

Compared to the copy posted in D Daniella's link in post #53, it looks so wrong, with the different original printed text and the added text in a very different type font.

 

[fishman123]

So a short letter in reply saying its illegible will do?

[Desperate Daniella]

You need to quote the illegible documents regulations. I'll try and find them.

[fishman123]

These?

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/1014/regulation/3/made

[Desperate Daniella]

This bit -

The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies ofDocuments) Regulations 1983 (SI 1557) states:

2. Legibility ofnotices and copy documents and wording of Prescribed Forms

(1) The lettering inevery notice in a Form prescribed by these Regulations and in every copy of anexecuted agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in theAct and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of theAct shall, apart from any signature, be easily legible and of a colour which isreadily distinguishable from the .

But you should also add all the other things too.

[slick132]

Hi Fishy,

 

Don't rely on illegibility alone.

 

As well as that, you can say the document is clearly not original as it's been interfered with; it's not a credit agreement but an application form lacking the required Prescribed Terms; given the age of the a/c (pre 2007), they need to provide the original doc't for any legal enforcement.

 

If the DN was faulty for any reason, include that too.

 

Keep it short and to-the-point.

 

[fishman123]

Told them it doesn't come close to satisfying my request and any litigation will be defended.

 

Had a reply back that my acc has been placed on hold while they consult other internal and external departments.

[slick132]

Thanks Fishy and keep us posted.

 

[fishman123]

All went quiet until a begging letter from Lowell today telling me they will accept £30 per month, thanks but no thanks.

 

My last payment to BC was April 2009 so this is now SB isn't it? Question is, do I tell them or just ignore them? No doubt they will say it's 6 years from default.

 

Can I just say thanks to all who helped over the past few years, it has been very much appreciated.

[slick132]

Hi Fishy,

 

Last pay't in April 2009 makes the a/c probably SB'd by now. Post #10 said they defaulted the a/c in Aug 2009 so you should be in the clear. If Lowells had anything that they thought made the a/c enforceable, they'd have taken action by now.

 

To be on the safe side, I'd ignore Lowell's letter for now.

 

Maybe send the SB letter from the Library but no need for that yet.

 

Edited September 9, 2015 by slick132
2009 !

[fishman123]

Thanks Slick, just checked my credit file and the default shows as February 2010, curious when the default notice from Mercers was August 2009. Tempted to send the SB letter to make sure Lowell don't try the court route using their default date as the 6 year marker.

[slick132]

Hi Fishy,

 

Re Lowells, I'd leave it for now. If they take court action, SB is an absolute defence.

 

What you could do instead is write to BC and the CRA's to complain that the default date is incorrect and should be amended to reflect the Aug 2009 date that Mercers set. Accordingly, if they fail to correct the situation immediately you will take further action which may include a court claim for damages.

 

[fishman123]

Thanks Slick, I will hold tight.

 

I will dig out the default notice but no rush for credit file to be clear, I've lived without credit for 6 years and quite like it.