Jump to content


FightToTheEnd

Reply by Egg to "Approved Limit" point

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3524 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi FightToTheEnd,

 

Very well put, am chasing Egg for PPI repayments at the moment but then intend to have a go with enforceability.

 

Would you mind if I plagiarised some of your comments when I do.

 

Regards,

 

Bosun.


Please note: I have no formal qualifications in this area and any advice offered is given in good faith. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem at all, feel free. (in fact there is an element of this in my letter!)

 

Anyone else have any thoughts before I send it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally, id be inclined to reduce it to about a 1/4 of its length- you play right into their hands by going into too much detail (IMO) and could "box yourself in with your own arguments at a later date when you dont need to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any part(s) in particular? The only point I thought about not including was mentioning the high court case?

 

I honestly can't see anything else which could disadvantage me though always happy to learn and see another point of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is this better?

 

I refer to your letter of 12th November. Once again I do not agree that my complaint is settled and I still consider the account to be in serious dispute.

I am surprised that you consider the term “approved limit” being a recognised prescribed term to be a “well established point of law” and would be interested in your references of when this has shown to be the case.

An “approved limit” does in no way imply “credit limit” and as such is not a prescribed terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

You may also wish to consider the cases of Wilson V FCT and Wilson V Hurstanger as both these binding judgements hold that if a regulated agreement is missing any prescribed terms, or if the terms are mis-stated then the agreement is irredeemably unenforceable.

 

Coming on to your comment about default charges and your comment as quoted “With regard to the allegation that the agreement fails to correctly detail the default charges which may be payable by your client….” I would be grateful if you would explain who my client is? I have only dealt with matter personally and have had no legal representation. Please clarify.

Your comment that the charges are clearly set out in clause 17 and that these are referenced in the agreement is interesting, however I have to inform you IT CANNOT BE! The reasons for this is that Regulation 2 (4) Consumer Credit Agreement Regulations 1983 (SI1983/1553) requires that the statutory information set out within Para 3-19 of schedule 1 and 2 SI1983/1553 should be shown as a whole and not interspersed with other information if the agreement is to be properly executed and compliant with section 61 CCA 1974

Finally, please note that I will deal with matter only in writing and I would be grateful if you would also advise Credit Collections Agencies of this point.

I trust this letter makes my position perfectly clear and I look forward to hearing that you will not be perusing this matter further. May I also respectfully remind you of the restrictions placed upon Egg being as this account is still in serious dispute

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

This is in my opinion and my situation only but...

The OC's have now started sending out letters in which they now purport to satisfy the complaint you had. In this instance of mine if you do not dispute the facts they have supplied then they consider the account not to be in dispute and this is stated within the template letters they send giving you a set amount of time in which to respond. When my cases go to court and if challenged off the prosecution that the account is not in dispute how can you do so if you have not provided reasoning to the contrary as requested. I consider it important to keep the account with the original OC as this prevents harrassment and even more correspondence with a DCA at a later date.

Therefore I would argue that any attempt by an OC to cancel out your original complaint should be replied to as effectively as possible. I further reason that its not as if EGG will not already be aware of your defence because they would have been receiving the same on for a number of months if not years.

I think the only point they are trying to establish is how well you are being advised and quoting what you have learned and what they already know cannot be of harm can it?

It will be interesting as I intend to send a detailed letter in response to the template I received and therefore we will be able to judge which is the best way forward either plain and simple or a detailed response. (I will not be holding my breath that either will be positive though)

 

 

Example..

My HBOS account got into numerous amounts of postal ping after I placed the account in dispute. The final letter stated the reasoning in which they considered they had answered my complaint and in which they now considered the complaint resolved and not in dispute. I thought that I had played the game enough and with advice decided not to correspond further. To cut a long story short the account is now with Robinson Way who are an absolute pain and it took several letters and still its not back with the OC as they considered the complaint satisfied and the dispute resolved.

The above is my opinion only

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just my idea of a reply

 

dear sirs,

 

I refer to your letter of 12th November. I do not agree that my complaint is settled and I still consider the account to remain in dispute.

 

You are i think, well aware that the term “approved limit” is not recognised as stating a means by which a credit limit will be arrived at nor does it meet the requirement for you to state the "credit limit"as required by the consumer credit act 1974 (as amended)

 

Further, an agreement which does not contain all of the prescribed terms, or if the terms are mis-stated, then the agreement is unenforceable and a court will be prevented by virtue of s1279(3) from enforcing the agreement. I refer you to Wilson V FCT and Wilson V Hurstanger as authority for this proposition

 

I would also point out that the prescribed terms may not be found in, nor referred to in any other document, nor may they be "lost" within the body of the general terms and conditions of the agreement, rather they must be clearly identifiable to the signature of the document at the time of signing the agreement.

 

Finally, please note that I will deal with this matter only in writing and I would be grateful if you would also advise anyone acting on your behalf, including Credit Collections Agencies of this point.

 

Y F

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the help guys, it really is appreciated!

 

I've done a bit of a miss-mash of the above letters but I'm now fairly happy with what I've sent them.

 

That said, I think it's pretty irrelevant in any case as they'll carry on as they see fit whatever I do!

 

Ho hum, I'll keep the forum posted of any further developments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AA99 made a sound comment on another thread of mine stating they had more than they deserved back!! and he was to pay no more!! I agree with that.

However it is foolhardy to presume that these people will lie down, they wont, and that is why I suggested that at all opportunities you put your defence into perspective.

That does not mean to say that it will make one difference to them or the outcome but at least they will know you are aware of your consumer rights. Thats why I think you should indulge them in your knowledge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is the view that if you reply to them all the time, you are just continuing a game of letter ping pong. I tend more to your view Exasperated. I think if they raise a new point then there is always a need to respond to it in as effective a way as we are able to in order to rebut it. However, if all we are doing is repeating the same point over and over, then i think its best to make clear to them that we are repeating and after repeating the point once (maybe twice) to leave it at that.

But otherwise I would agree with you - these are rubber people - they will not lie down and admit they are defeated. Even when they are wrong they are still right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we keep a tally of how much time we spend in responding and charge them - perhaps enclosing an updated statement with each reply we have to make?

 

Personally I just reply to anything else they have raised and then cut and past the rest of my previous letter after the new bit. That way I figure if it did go to court the judge would see I have made every attempt to get a pre-court resolution - and if any "sensible" manager were to review it then they might decide to put their efforts elsewhere into someone more gullible. The DCA's don't like work and are more likely to hand the case back if you make them work too hard.

 

BD


£50k saved and £7k charges refunded:

MBNA & A&L 35% F&F direct - saved £23k. Birmingham Midshires £1700 charges refunded

Abbey Loan/BCW 50% - saved £2k. Barclaycard/CSL 40% - saved £6k

Monument/DCA 35% - saved £1k. LTSB/Wescot 50% - saved £4k

HBOS Visa £5k charges refund via Blair Oliver Scott

RBS Direct Line/(genuine) solicitors June 2010 40% - saved £3k

Morgan Stanley/Aktiv Kapital £11k SB Nov 2010

Over £40k balance write off and charges refunds to fight for:

HBOS O/d Charges £5k. Egg Loan/Aktiv Kapital CCA Dispute £8k

Egg Card/Fredrickson taking £5 monthly but CCA & Charges Dispute £4k

Goldfish/1st Credit DN/TN Dispute £9k. Capital One/CSL charges claim £4k

Barclaycard/CSL taking £5 monthly on £10k debt

 

I hope I have helped - if I have please hit my star - and recognise the others who have helped too.

Bigdebtor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quick summary. Egg card taken out in 1999 with a balance of approx £5K, no payment since June 2009 and the standard "apporved limit" CCA and complaint on this basis made to Egg.

 

Had a couple of letters from Egg and also CCA (Egg's DCA) and now had this reply:

 

I feel the way forward is to refute their claims as follows:

 

The Heading being a statutory correct heading at the time? No it wasn't. Not a prescripted term re CCA 1974.

 

Well establish point of law that "Approved Limit" satisfies regulations. Again, not a prescribed term. Request examples where point of law proved?

 

Central Trust -v- Spurway Not sure - advice appreciated.

 

All thoughts appreciated and some kind of direction to of reply would be good. I'll leave it a few days but will post up my intended reply before sending.

 

Heck, it's all go this week!

 

egg1.jpg?t=1258371873

egg2.jpg?t=1258371934

 

Hello again same old stuff

 

Spurrway not applicable not a prescedent only a couny court case and not a credit card agreement and not even the same point.

There has no case ever been won using this argument if there had you would have heard aboout it alol over the news as you have other less contreversial ones.

I have proof of several cases where egg have prosecuted using these agreements i repeat there hase never been any proof of the success of this argument althought it has been promised many times oner the laset twelve months and lately was due on the 30th of november still nothing.

 

Complete waste of time

 

Cheers

Peter


VT against welcome finance costs returned

Refund against jetline travel

Caital one settled 6th November

N1 Filed Yorkshire Bank 26/09/06

£677+£172int.+£80Chgs acknowledgemment of claim recieved 29th/09,Defence recieved 27th October Recieved AO 30t hOctt Settled in Full 8th December

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Myself, I just reply to important letters, only the ones from Solicitors.

 

Why waste your life away reply to every stupid automated threatagram? My mate received 7, yes 7 letters in 7 days, all from the same company. Not one of them was interesting, they were all the same gibberish.

 

I have personally received 2 Solicitors letters regarding an Egg account. The first one explained Moorecroft had defaulted on my CCA request, and the second letter told him to read the first letter as it still stands and I have nothing else to say on this matter until something more substancial is sent, and stop bothering me as they are now starting to irrtate me.

 

I haven`t heard anything for quite a number of weeks now.


If I have helped or made you laugh in any way in your hour of need, then please click my scales <<<<<<<<<< ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myself, I just reply to important letters, only the ones from Solicitors.

 

Why waste your life away reply to every stupid automated threatagram? My mate received 7, yes 7 letters in 7 days, all from the same company. Not one of them was interesting, they were all the same gibberish.

 

I have personally received 2 Solicitors letters regarding an Egg account. The first one explained Moorecroft had defaulted on my CCA request, and the second letter told him to read the first letter as it still stands and I have nothing else to say on this matter until something more substancial is sent, and stop bothering me as they are now starting to irrtate me.

 

I haven`t heard anything for quite a number of weeks now.

 

whilst you can safely ignore letters which contain points that you have already answered, it is always advisable to have a copy of a written response to any new point or argument raised by the other side

 

ignoring DCA's (for instance because you don't like them) or any other representative other than a solicitor is NOT a good idea

 

when it comes to costs applications in court the judge will take very much into account what each party has/has not done prior to court proceedings in order to mitigate their losses/ resolve the issues

 

further, as far as is possible it is advisable to have regard to the fact that a judge may later read your letters,

 

telling the other side that they are "irritating you" may seem like a good idea at the time but will not impress a judge! (IMO)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

irritating me is not supposed to impress a judge. it`s supposed to inform whoever keeps sending the same letters over and over, that they are starting to `irritate me`.

 

I`m sure everyone of use on here has had the same letter numerous times from the same bunch of clowns, albeit probably in different words.

 

These companies have automatic systems, their is no need to reply to every letter. Morecrap for example, can send out 40,000 letters a day. Perhaps they should be sued for spamming.

 

I`m of the opinion that I don`t owe Morecrap a penny, so there is no need to reply to their waffle. Why on earth would I want to pay a third party anything when I don`t owe them?

 

These companies are of no use in this world whatsoever, they are only around to make money out of peoples misery, by interfereing with matters that quite simply has nothing to do with them. They should all be closed down and all of the employees thrown of the beach banks with the rest of the rubbish. They`re not much good for anything else.

 

If these companies need to be informed of anything more than once, then I can`t see the point as quite simply, like I`ve said, they go into an automatic empty head mode.


If I have helped or made you laugh in any way in your hour of need, then please click my scales <<<<<<<<<< ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i was giving general advice to people to keep a full audit trail of what was received and responded to

 

folk may take the advice or not as they see fit

 

you'd be surprised how many people who profess to have "all the answers" suddenly become tongue tied and then slapped down by the judge when they are unable to provide anything other than "opinions" when challenged to provide ONLY facts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I`m not trying to be clever dd, or in any way pretend to be a know all.

 

But, lets look at it this way. If a Bank or whatever can`t be bothered to deal with your dispute, whatever it is, they hand you over to DCA`s. Now, if they are so sure they are in the right, then why don`t they just sort the matter out in court or even bring the FOS in?

 

I have accounts which have been to about 10 DCA`s and a number of Solicitors each. Why hasn`t the Bank just acted properley instead of giving the accounts to people who just hassle you with letters of doom?

 

Anyone receiving a letter from a DCA for the first time with all their usual threats of death and destruction and what not will either pass out in fear or go into a defend and destroy mode (me).

 

My reply would be, I replied to their first letter and they kept bombarding me with the same letters. I informed them to refer to the first letter which clearly they ignored. I have more important things to do than write a letter everyday to a third party whose only involvement is to extorte money from me, claiming I owe them.

 

Anyway, rant over :D


If I have helped or made you laugh in any way in your hour of need, then please click my scales <<<<<<<<<< ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they hand them over to dca's and sell the debts on because they dont want to tarnish their image!!

 

as i said , i'm not suggesting that folk respond to the SAME letters- only that they deal with any new issue that crops up becuase the one they did NOT deal with is the one that will catch them out later

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi DD,

 

Now, I am totaly with you on that last post.

 

Even though, I don`t reply to all, if not most of them, I DO READ them all and decide if it warrants a reply or not.

 

As for the Banks not wanting their image to be tarnished, well, we all know what parrassites they really are don`t we?

 

I don`t think the war with the Banks is over just yet. I think it`s quieting down a while, while everyone reloads ;)

 

Catch you late mate, ciao for now.

 

 

N.P


If I have helped or made you laugh in any way in your hour of need, then please click my scales <<<<<<<<<< ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to reply to absolutely everything, which at the time made me feel very much better as I felt I was taking action and keeping in control. If I didn't answer I fretted constantly and thought all manner of nasties would come tumbling upon me; even with the support of members here it doesn't completely eradicate the fear, especially at the beginning, and replying to their crap was my way of dealing with it. I don't think it's a bad thing to do if it helps you psychologically which it really did for me.

 

Now however I tend to reply to complaint responses, legal (well, threat of legal) stuff, and DCA's when they've sent a few letters - then my response just says 'I've received your letters of X, X and X dates' etc.

 

Much as I never ever want to end up in a court, I am always mindful of the fact I might, and as such I want to be able to clearly show that I have tried to rectify matters time and again.

 

Of course with some I have now got to a ridiculous round robin which I think just needs a 'this has become circular, take me to court or sod off' letter. I reckon after 18 months of proving my points I can safely say I've done my best:rolleyes:


Time flies like an arrow...

Fruit flies like a banana.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

another easy way to handle repetetive letters is to fax them rather than post letters (late in the evening is best)

 

i always add a sentence that i am unable to receive faxes then turn my fax auto off

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I've had a reply (shock, horror!)! Not only a reply, but a real letter written by a real person who even signed it. They're still wrong mind, but it's a start!

 

Letter as follows, comments appreciated:

 

Eggy1.jpg?t=1263817121

 

eggy2.jpg?t=1263817167

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you might want to advise them that NOWHERE in either the Act or the Regs is the phrase "approved limit" used - indeed they havent used it since 2005 (you might want to ask them why they changed their practice?)

Also a reference to the Regs (1983/1553 - Agreements regs) specifically part 2 para 4, which deals with how information is to be ordered/ sequenced, could be useful. For instance the LAST item is supposed to be the signature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...