Halifax unsigned cca what next?

[Ruskie1]

Hi Halifax have sent me standard ts and cs instead of cca. I then sent a 2nd later stating this was incorrect and they needed to send me the correct agreement and I will stop paying until they do. They have sent me a your are 2 months overdue letter and nothing else. What do I do now?

[vint1954]

Hi Halifax have sent me standard ts and cs instead of cca. I then sent a 2nd later stating this was incorrect and they needed to send me the correct agreement and I will stop paying until they do. They have sent me a your are 2 months overdue letter and nothing else. What do I do now?

Can you post the agreement, minus personal details.

[Ruskie1]

Hi, apologies I had to scan 4 sides seperately, basically undated agreement with no signature

http://www.fileden.com/getfile.php?file_path=http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/8/31/2560310/halifax%20agreement0001.JPG http://www.fileden.com/getfile.php?file_path=http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/8/31/2560310/halifax%20agreement0002.JPG http://www.fileden.com/getfile.php?file_path=http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/8/31/2560310/halifax%20agreement0003.JPG http://www.fileden.com/getfile.php?file_path=http://www.fileden.com/files/2009/8/31/2560310/halifax%20agreement0004.JPG

[Ruskie1]

also same thing from Barclaycard -standard morgan stanley credit card agreement no signature- sent back the template send signed one not got debt collectors chasing

[vint1954]

Well, the usual non complient rubbish from Halifax.

 

Send this next.

 

xxxxxx 2009.

Dear xxxxxxxxx,

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

Re account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I write regarding recent communication regarding the above account. I acknowledge no dept to your organisation.

Further to my request under the above act, your attention is drawn to the fact that this account remains subject to a lawful serious dispute. On xxxxxxxx, by recorded delivery, I requested that you supply me a copy of the executed credit agreement covering this account pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 78, a copy of this request is enclosed. To date you have failed to comply with my request, supplying only a generic agreement and unrelated terms & conditions, which cannot be linked to any agreement which you claim that I have signed. Without production of the said agreement I am unable to assess if I am indeed liable for any alleged debt to you, nor does it give me any chance to evaluate whether any original agreement was ‘properly executed’ as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Contrary to your assertion, xxxxxxxx have not complied with the terms of CCA 1974 s78. The documents that you have supplied, do not comply with your duties to supply a “True Copy” of any agreement you claim to have been signed by me, for pre 2007 agreements. As you will be further aware, an agreement is not executed, until signed by both parties, so the document that you have supplied, being a reconstruction, cannot be a True Copy of an Executed Agreement.

While this account remains in serious dispute, the relevant main points of the Law and OFT regulations while the account is in this state and xxxxxx remain in default are:

• You may not ask for payment against this account.
  
• I am not obliged to offer any payment against this account.
  
• You cannot register any data with a third party.
  
• You cannot take any enforcement action, including registering Defaults.
  
• You cannot pass the account on to a third party for collection.
  
• You cannot sell the account.
  

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.”

I am now granting to you a further 7 days to produce a copy of an executable agreement. After that I will consider that the above matter is closed and that you will no longer pursue the alleged debt. If you are insisting that the non enforceable document, that you have supplied, is the only alleged agreement in your possession, then I would suggest that the best course of action would be to immediately set the balance of the above account number to zero.

I look forward to your response.

[vint1954]

also same thing from Barclaycard -standard morgan stanley credit card agreement no signature- sent back the template send signed one not got debt collectors chasing

Just send the same letter to them.

[Ruskie1]

Thanks so much doing it now!

[Ruskie1]

Hi, I have recieved an intended court letter from blair oliver scott on behalf of halifax still no signed agreement and I have sent BOS a letter stating this but they still call , sending a letter threatening debt collector coming to my home and an intended court letter. Please help

[ejleigh68]

Scare tactics Ballsup Orrible and Snotty are Halifaxs in house DCA they are just trying to get you to contact them.

You need to send the cease harrasment letter below to them that should stop the calls.

Harrasment Calls1.doc

[mevsthem]

To be honest the best thing you can do is buy a truecall. I sent the harrasment letter and they still try and ring on a daily basis. I dont think they even read their mail

[vint1954]

Hi, I have recieved an intended court letter from blair oliver scott on behalf of halifax still no signed agreement and I have sent BOS a letter stating this but they still call , sending a letter threatening debt collector coming to my home and an intended court letter. Please help

Hi Ruskie1,

 

BOS are just another desk in Halifax.

 

Amend the letter below to suit your situation.

 

Dear Sirs,

I was somewhat bemused to receive your letter dated xxxxxxx.

Despite my numerous communications with Halifax, it appears that they and now you are ignoring my lawful dispute. I would have assumed that Halifax had have passed all relevant communications to yourselves, so you should be fully aware of the dispute.

This account has been in serious dispute since xxxxxxxx, following Halifax’s failure to comply with s78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Following my lawful request for a true copy of any executed agreement that they may hold, all that I have been supplied is a xxxxxxxxxxxx. This, as I am sure that you are aware, does not come close to Halifax fulfilling their duties under the act.

For the avoidance of any doubt on your part, I have included section 78(1) and 78(6) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, which states…

 

78 Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement

(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing ( 12 working days + 2 ) to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of £1, shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

(a) the state of the account, and

(b) the amount, if any, currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and

© the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.

(6) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;

I would remind you that while this alleged account remains in dispute, that Halifax and their agents:

• May not ask for payment against this account.
  
• I am not obliged to offer any payment against this account.
  
• Cannot register any data with a third party.
  
• Cannot take any enforcement action, including registering Defaults.
  
• Cannot pass the account on to a third party for collection.
  
• Cannot sell the account.
  

Halifax and now yourselves are in breach of the CCA 1974, the OFT guidelines on Debt collection, the Data protection act, the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 and under CPUTR 2008.

 

You also mention in your letter, that you can instruct your local door to door collection agents to call. You need to take note, that I have revoked the licence under common law for Halifax or their agents to visit me at my property. Any visit to my home will involve Police attendance.

For the avoidance of doubt, I have again included this notice below.

TAKE URGENT NOTE:

I DO NOT WISH TO RECEIVE ANY REPRESENTATIVE OF YOUR ORGANISATION, OR INDEED AN AGENT OR REPRESENTATIVE EMPLOYED BY ANY ORGANISATION THAT YOU ISSUE INSTRUCTIONS TO.

 

There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.)

THEREFORE TAKE NOTE THAT I REVOKE LICENSE UNDER COMMON LAW FOR YOU, OR YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TO VISIT ME AT MY PROPERTY AND IF YOU DO SO, THEN YOU WILL BE LIABLE FOR DAMAGES FOR A TORT OF TRESSPASS AND ACTION WILL BE TAKEN, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO , POLICE ATTENDANCE.

 

I also caution you here that should you ignore my request on this point, the actions of your representative(s) will happily be recorded either by CCTV or by telephone recording equipment – whichever is applicable. Accordingly I reserve the right to use any evidence of you or your representatives’ ignoring this request in connection with any actions that I choose to pursue, including media exposure. THE POLICE WILL BE CALLED TO ANY TRESPASS.

 

Should it be your intention to disregard my wishes, and break your obligations, please be advised that the following rules also apply, as laid down by the OFT in respect of debt collection, and that you, as a holder of a consumer credit license, are obliged to follow:

The areas of the OFT guidance which applies to you in this instance are:

Debt collection visits

2.12 Examples of unfair practices are:

 

a. not making the purpose of any proposed visit clear, for example, merely stating that collectors or field agents will call is not sufficient

f. visiting or threatening to visit debtors without prior agreement when the debt is deadlocked or disputed

Deceptive and/or unfair methods

2.8 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

k. not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt.

In addition, I have also issued Halifax with a notice under s10 of the data protection act. If you continue to process data relating to myself, you will also be in breach of this notice. I am sure that I do not have to remind you of the penalties and compensation involved, if you ignore this issue.

With reference to your further threats, Blair, Oliver and Scott Limited, must take note that such threats are in breach of OFT guidelines and CPUTR 2008 regulations. I suggest that you return this account to Halifax, for them to fulfil their legal obligations. I shall also be updating the OFT and Trading Standards with this latest breach.

 

I do believe this makes my position clear and unambiguous.

 

Yours sincerely