Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
      • 161 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
  • Recommended Topics

6 CCA letters ready to go-- few questions, then our progress


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5200 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

Very good. Nice letter. Got some "wrong words" put but very good. Give me a few minutes and I would put an edited version of it (mostly will be the same but some small changes and additions).

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 219
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Have you asked Robinson Way for a 'thingy'? According to one previous poster (it may even have been yourself), it's their name for a CCA request?

 

I deem that all CCA requests be changed to the name 'thingy' regarding all cases involving Robinson Way. Note to moderators.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, as said, very impressed. Have a look at this. The reason I have edited a bit is because you have used some wrong words (e.g. you do not call contacting me "conversations" but they are called "communications"). Also have added some more info. Also when writing to a DCA especially when you are in the right you do not ask. You demand. And, the other thing is, if they have failed to send a CCA copy and have written that they cannot send one, then you do not ask for it again. ;)

 

But as you will see, the majority is yours. Good show. Impressed.

 

Dear Sirs

 

I am writing in relation to the quantity and frequency of telephone callslink8.gif that I have received from your company, which I deem to be personally harassing.

 

As I have verbally requested that these stop, but I am still receiving calls I am now demanding that all further communication from your company to be made in writing only.

 

I am of the view that your continued harassment of me by telephone puts you in breach of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

 

Please note that if you contact me by telephone, after a formal request not to, you will be in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1949) and you will have committed an offence under the Communications Act (2003) s.127. Therefore I reserve the right to report you to OFCOM, Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading, meaning that you will be liable to prosecution and a substantial fine.

 

Be advised that considering I am notifying you that you must not contact me by phone again, then and under the Data Protection Act, you have to remove my telephone number from your records being in whichever way/form it is held and that any further telephone callslink8.gif from your company will be recorded.

 

As a registered debt collectionlink8.gif agency you are licensed by the OFT and therefore have promised to abide by guidelines set out by the OFT. Should you fail to abide by the rules and conditions you undertook to obtain your license, I believe it is understood you can be reported to said OFT so that you can be investigated as to whether you are fit to hold said license

 

I refer you to the following from the OFT Guidelines namely:

 

Physical/psychological harassment

2.5 Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive.

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

 

Deceptive and/or unfair methods

2.7 Dealings with debtors are not to be deceitful and/or unfair.

2.8 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

f. passing on debtor details to debt management companies without the debtors' informed prior consent

i. failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued

 

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

 

Considering section 2.8f, I am now demanding a copy of the letter from the original creditor asking for my consent to have passed my data to your company. Furthermore you must also include a copy of my written response to such a request confirming my authority for my details to be passed onto yourselves. If you fail to supply this, not only will you be in breach of 2.8f above but will also be in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

In respect of the above paragraph, I require your written response including copies of both letters to reach myself in no longer than 14 days. Also as you have advised me by letter on numerous occasions that you cannot obtain a signed executed agreement as I requested under the legislation contained within s.78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 the law states this account is in disputelink8.gif and therefore unenforceable and has been since 19/11/09.

You are to note that you are currently in breach of all the above guidelines. Furthermore, should you be unable to make available the above requested documents within the stipulated time, then you are acting contrary to the terms and conditions you agreed to abide by when applying for your license. Should this be the case then you are to take this letter as a service of a section 10 of the Data Protection Act 1998 and cease and desist from handling my personal datalink8.gif any further. You are also to take notice that you are to cease and desist from contacting me again and failure of this I will be reporting your company to the OFT for investigation.

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, I have got to say......... wow! How about this one. :D:D

 

As a registered debt collectionlink8.gif agency you are licensed by the OFT and therefore have promised to abide by guidelines set out by the OFT. Should you fail to abide by the rules and conditions you undertook to obtain your license, I believe it is understood you can be reported to said OFT so that you can be investigated as to whether you are fit to hold said license

 

:D:D

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of curiousity, you say in the letter that they have written that they cannot send you a copy of the executed agreement. You are sure of this? You have this in writing?

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, I have got to say......... wow! How about this one. :D:D

 

As a registered debt collectionlink8.gif agency you are licensed by the OFT and therefore have promised to abide by guidelines set out by the OFT. Should you fail to abide by the rules and conditions you undertook to obtain your license, I believe it is understood you can be reported to said OFT so that you can be investigated as to whether you are fit to hold said license

 

:D:D

 

lol, wonder where i got that from :D

 

Aha! It was yourself, and earlier in this thread about the Robinson Way thingy.

 

yep i'm the one thats gets legal thingys:lol::lol::lol:

 

Out of curiousity, you say in the letter that they have written that they cannot send you a copy of the executed agreement. You are sure of this? You have this in writing?

 

 

exhibit "A" your honour ;)

 

 

img014.jpg

 

 

and a further letter stating they can't get hold of one, the nice lady on the phone last night said that "many catalogue firms don't provide them therefore they don't need to provide one, and just because they can't take legal action or take me to court dosen't mean they can't pursue the debt"

Edited by Gaznkaz08
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good. Nice you to see you are "picking up" and learning to "look after yourself".

 

Now, we move on to a training exercise. Think very hard, put the answers to your wife (or a friend) before you post because I WANT the right answers. I DO NOT want just an answer. You will get ONE shot at this just like as if you were in front of a judge.

 

Q 1: In that letter it says that you are clearly liable because you have been making payments.

 

I want you to challenge as to whether you are still liable or not and why.

 

Q 2: In that letter it says that they can still report you to CRAs. Tell me why you believe they have no right to do this and why.

 

Remember. You will get one shot at answering those two questions. You might think you know the answers BUT I am their solicitor and I am prepared to rip your replies to pieces to prove that you still owe money. So think hard before you reply. Try and imagine what I can say back to you to prove you wrong.

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

s40 Admin of justice Act doesn't apply now - superseded

Repealed = Does not apply any more.

Superceeded = Changed by what? How?

 

s40 is still there and is still used by a lot of different agencies. I take it you are referring to this thread????? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/198612-administration-justice-act-cabot.html

 

As it says in that thread, that is the OFT guidance but the OFT does not repeal or superceeds laws. It does not have that power. It can say what it believes should be done and applied. BUT we also know that it is basically just a "wolf with false teeth" as it hardly does anything to control banks and DCAs.

 

Read Administration of Justice Act 1970 (c.31) - Statute Law Database

 

Debt Factsheets - Harassment of people in debt by creditors

 

Administration of Justice Act 1970 - Debt Help UK

 

http://www.payplan.com/debt-library/bailiffs-harassment.php

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good. Nice you to see you are "picking up" and learning to "look after yourself".

 

Now, we move on to a training exercise. Think very hard, put the answers to your wife (or a friend) before you post because I WANT the right answers. I DO NOT want just an answer. You will get ONE shot at this just like as if you were in front of a judge.

 

Q 1: In that letter it says that you are clearly liable because you have been making payments.

 

I want you to challenge as to whether you are still liable or not and why.

We have only been making payments as we have been harassed and pressurised by RW, we had numerous DCA’s contacting us at the time and in a bid to start sorting ourselves out we just made an offer to pay without making the correct enquiries as to if we were actually liable for the alleged account , we have been provided with no documentation regarding this account what so ever, apart from statements showing our payments to RW. RW way admitted in their very first response that there was no CCA relating to this alledged account in existence, failing to provide an executed agreement when requested is mentioned in CCA s77(6)

"If the creditor fails to comply with Subsection (1)(a) He is not entitled , while the default continues, to enforce the agreement. Therefore this account has become unenforceable at law"

 

 

Q 2: In that letter it says that they can still report you to CRAs.

 

Tell me why you believe they have no right to do this and why.

 

Due too their failure to comply with the cca request s78 (1) the law states the account is in dispute. The letter they signed for on 08/11/2009 states under section 10 of the Data Protection Act they must cease processing any of my data in relation to this account which includes passing any of my information to any other DCA and CRA

 

 

Remember. You will get one shot at answering those two questions. You might think you know the answers BUT I am their solicitor and I am prepared to rip your replies to pieces to prove that you still owe money. So think hard before you reply. Try and imagine what I can say back to you to prove you wrong.

 

be gentle :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why be gentle? You do not like clicking peoples scales when they help you so I am going to mean.

 

Q1: So a running agreement is a s.77? Because as far as I know a s.77 it is subsection (4) and a s.78 which is for a running agreement is subsection (6) http://www.fisa.co.uk/downloads/CCA%201974.pdf#search=%22%22Consumer%20Credit%20Act%201974%22%20licensing%22

 

Also you have confirmed that although the agreement is unenforceable the debt is still there.

 

This is why you think before you say something.

Q2: Wrong answer. Read the McGuffick judgement. Not supplying a copy of the agreement makes the agreement unenforceable by a court BUT they can still put a default with the CRA.

 

Try again and give a different answer. You have a letter there re your wife where the DCA referred to McGuffick. The question will also answer re your wife. So make it a good answer.

 

McGuffick judgement http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/judgments_guidance/mcguffick-v-rbs.pdf

 

Find out why he still got the default with the CRA.

Edited by nick20045
wrote dispute instead of default

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why be gentle? You do not like clicking peoples scales when they help you so I am going to mean.

 

i've clicked yours before

 

Q1: So a running agreement is a s.77? Because as far as I know a s.77 it is subsection (4) and a s.78 which is for a running agreement is subsection (6) http://www.fisa.co.uk/downloads/CCA%201974.pdf#search=%22%22Consumer%20Credit%20Act%201974%22%20licensing%22

 

that was taken from the notice of dispute letter i sent them which was a template, i take it thats why you don't like template letters then??

 

so s77 is fixed sum likes loans and s78 is cards basically

 

 

this part in that CCA PDf 77(1) and 78(1):

 

shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any)

 

so they could be right that the alleged account may never of had an executed agreement

 

Also you have confirmed that although the agreement is unenforceable the debt is still there.

 

 

isn't the debt always going to be there though, just unenforcable, they have statements to show the debt is there

 

 

This is why you think before you say something.

Q2: Wrong answer. Read the McGuffick judgement. Not supplying a copy of the agreement makes the agreement unenforceable by a court BUT they can still put a default with the CRA.

 

Try again and give a different answer. You have a letter there re your wife where the DCA referred to McGuffick. The question will also answer re your wife. So make it a good answer.

 

McGuffick judgement http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/judgments_guidance/mcguffick-v-rbs.pdf

 

Find out why he still got the default with the CRA.

 

i'll have a look at the mcguffick stuff tomorrow, need to have an "empty head" few hours and a beer :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll have a look at the mcguffick stuff tomorrow, need to have an "empty head" few hours and a beer :D
Go forth Luke our Jedi and may the force be with you. :D

 

Originally Posted by nick20045 viewpost.gif

Why be gentle? You do not like clicking peoples scales when they help you so I am going to mean.

 

i've clicked yours before Mean sod! Only once after all the posts I have made giving you guidance and I am trying to teach you how to analyse things and be able to look after yourself.

 

Q1: So a running agreement is a s.77? Because as far as I know a s.77 it is subsection (4) and a s.78 which is for a running agreement is subsection (6) http://www.fisa.co.uk/downloads/CCA%...20licensing%22

 

that was taken from the notice of dispute letter i sent them which was a template, i take it thats why you don't like template letters then?? I have nothing against templates. I have a great problem about people who just use templates and do not know what they are sending.

 

so s77 is fixed sum likes loans and s78 is cards basically Correct.

 

 

this part:

 

shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any)

 

so they could be right that the alleged account may never of had an executed agreement Irrelevant. Once you agree to something then there is an agreement. Some are what is called "Written in stone" and some are called "Written in water". The ones in "stone" are enforceable the ones in "water" are not.

 

Also you have confirmed that although the agreement is unenforceable the debt is still there.

 

 

isn't the debt always going to be there though, just unenforcable, they have statements to show the debt is there No not really. Read the OFT draft guidance and see what is missing. Also read the McGuffick judgement and see what was missing by the bank. It starts with the letter "s". (See unlike you I am a nice person). :D I even gave you a hint.

 

 

This is why you think before you say something.

Q2: Wrong answer. Read the McGuffick judgement. Not supplying a copy of the agreement makes the agreement unenforceable by a court BUT they can still put a default with the CRAlink8.gif.

 

Try again and give a different answer. You have a letter there re your wife where the DCAlink8.gif referred to McGuffick. The question will also answer re your wife. So make it a good answer.

 

McGuffick judgement http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/jud...fick-v-rbs.pdf

 

Find out why he still got the default with the CRAlink8.gif.

Read the McGuffick judgement and answer me the questions. Come on!!!!!! You know you can do it.

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you can work the questions out then after you get the reply re the SAR for your wife you should be able to draft a letter answering the DCAs comments re McGuffick. ;);)

 

I am not going to do it for you. You NEED to understand certain things so that IF it was to go to Court you can then know how to answer.

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mean sod! Only once after all the posts I have made giving you guidance and I am trying to teach you how to analyse things and be able to look after yourself. .

 

i have tried :-?

 

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to nick20045 again.

 

I have nothing against templates. I have a great problem about people who just use templates and do not know what they are sending.

 

well that must've been a template for disputed loan agreement :shock:

 

 

Once you can work the questions out then after you get the reply re the Subject Access Requestlink8.gif for your wife you should be able to draft a letter answering the DCAs comments re McGuffick. :wink::wink:

 

I am not going to do it for you. You NEED to understand certain things so that IF it was to go to Court you can then know how to answer.

 

i will do master yoda, but not tonight this padewan has had a hard week and needs to wind down a little:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

i have tried :-?

 

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to nick20045 again.

Mean sod! You mean you do not give anybody else any thanks!!!!!!!

 

Re rest of posts. Up to you. Just trying to show you different routes and arguments you can use.

If I have helped you or made you laugh by some witty remark and brightened your day................ the scales to click are over to your left hand side. :D:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mean sod! You mean you do not give anybody else any thanks!!!!!!!

 

to be honest i didn't even know about it till you pointed it out the other day:-|

 

Re rest of posts. Up to you. Just trying to show you different routes and arguments you can use.

 

i will definatley read through them as i am genuinely interested in expanding my knowledge:cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update Update

 

I recieved a yellow card within an envelope today re my TSB, who BLS are dealing with, but the card is from 'Allied International Credit LTD' ( Mr Dickey ), I called them and spoke to BSL then they asked how they could help, I reminded them that I was still awaiting their reply to my CCA request, they then put me through to somebody else who told me that I must still pay and that just because they have not complied with my request does not exempt me from the alleged debt. I say alleged they did'nt, he went on to say why are you not paying, it got quite heated so I hung up..any advice, as they have not responded to the cca request.

 

So can they still hassle me, just want to be 100% sure that I know my rights.

 

Cheers

 

Mr W

reeding this bls is part of tsb and not a debt collection agency. if U right to bls U get a reply from tsb 4 a s.77/s.78 application.
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...