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

[nick20045]

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).

[F_DCAs]

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.

[F_DCAs]

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

[nick20045]

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 calls 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 calls from your company will be recorded.

 

As a registered debt collection 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 dispute 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 data 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.

[nick20045]

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

 

As a registered debt collection 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

[nick20045]

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?

[Gaznkaz08]

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

 

As a registered debt collection 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

 

lol, wonder where i got that from

 

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:

 

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

 

 

 

 

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 January 29, 2010 by Gaznkaz08

[nick20045]

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.

[Gaznkaz08]

Thats not nice lol. Yeah i'll have a crack at it later after work get the old grey matter working . Would it even get into a courtroom though with what they have

[Guest HeftyHippo]

s40 Admin of justice Act doesn't apply now - superseded

[nick20045]

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

[Gaznkaz08]

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

[nick20045]

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 January 29, 2010 by nick20045
wrote dispute instead of default

[Gaznkaz08]

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

[nick20045]

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

Go forth Luke our Jedi and may the force be with you.

 

Originally Posted by nick20045

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). 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 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/jud...fick-v-rbs.pdf

 

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

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

[nick20045]

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.

[Gaznkaz08]

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

 

 

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

[nick20045]

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.

[Gaznkaz08]

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

[nicoalfredo]

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.