sainsburys credit card CCA return - now sold to cabot

[dx100uk]

very common trick

 

there is a large thread here somewhere

showing the ages of the different logos etc

 

i think we found out some of them were using stuff 5-6yrs old

 

dx

[casper1963]

i had this very thing yesterday a letter from lloyds tsb and 1st crud in the same envelope same date obviously the same printer and the same error on both letters

[firstship]

ims..I am unsure about there being a licensed agreement.as you say why do they bother if they (OC) dont have to provide one

 

dx..You are right the current DCA version of Halifax logo is at least 1 year old that has been sent to me.

 

 

casper.

Exactly what I mean,

it is deception in my book,

but ims21 may be correct,

but I will chase this further

 

Thanks FS

[theghost]

QUESTION..many of us have had the experience from more than one DCA (debt purchaser),where they the DCA has provided Letters of Assignment on the OCs headed notepaper, but it is so obvious they the DCA have been the author of the Assignment not the OC.

 

By using a photocopy of the OCs letterhead and passing it of as coming from the OC surely this is fraud??????????

 

FS

 

It won't be fraud in the true sense of the word if they have permission from the OC/companiy with the original letterhead.

 

If I have understood you corrently - it might just be when a creditor sells a debt they give the DCA permission to send out letters under their letter head where necessary to save themthe hassle of doing it themselves.

[firstship]

Theghost.Yes thats about it the OC giving the DCA permission,if this is the case then No fraud.

 

Thankyou FS

[Huff&Puff]

IF the OC has given permission. At least some of the time they appear not to know about this practice. A couple of years go, a lot of us suddenly got NOAs on Santander headed paper on what turned out to be alleged debts from the late 80s which were Stat Barred many times over. We soon discovered that they were from CapQuest, and another Cagger asked Santander if they knew that CQ were sending them. I seem to recall that they were not at all pleased. As far as I know, after Santander were contacted about it, none of us ever heard another peep from CQ.

[casper1963]

a dca can send a letter on another creditors letter head, there for could literally put in any balance figure they like and hope some poor unsuspecting debtor would pay up, some how dont seem fair to me. And please dont some one say all dca are honest and trust worthy and wouldn't dream of it

[firstship]

Casper ..Huff&puff thanks for your replies,

the more I think about this the more it concerns me that this practice even exists.

 

It would allow DCAs to be dishonest,allow them to make threats etc.

 

Nothing new then?

 

FS

 

To allow DCAs the right to send OC Assignments on their behalf is so dangerous and as you all state they can put in any amount and catch out unsuspecting debtors,

 

this should be looked into as a matter of urgency.

 

If DCAs where trustworthy it may not be an issue.

 

We are all aware DCAs do not qualify in any shape or form for the meaning of the word trustworthy.

 

FS

[theghost]

so basically a dca can send a letter on another creditors letter head, there for could literally put in any balance figure they like and hope some poor unsuspecting debtor would pay up, some how dont seem fair to me. And please dont some one say all dca are honest and trust worthy and wouldn't dream of it

"could literally put in any balance figure they like and hope some poor unsuspecting debtor would pay up"

 

wel lthen it would be blatant fraud and they should be in deep ****.

[intend]

My advice would be to inform the OC that some other organisation is using their letterheads and see hat reaction you get. As previously mentioned might be unaware of the practice.

 

The more that complain....

 

Intend

[firstship]

intend Hi good idea. worth a shot.lets see what happens

 

thanks FS

[firstship]

Got letter No2 from 1st Credit after ignoring Letter 1 which included the Halifax Assignment in the same envelope(have written to Halifax asking for their copy of their Assignment,and under separate cover have written to Halifax addressed to person whose name appears on the very doubtful Assignment purporting to have been written by Halifax)

 

Letter 2 is "the you have not responded to our first letter,we are considering issuing County Court Proceedings and they will claim all legal costs,make an application to my employer for earnings attachment (I am retired) application for seizure of assets by County Court Bailiff ,and a charging order on my property (I rent)..

 

I have in writing that Halifax do not have a copy of the signed agreement

 

What letter should I send? Have not paid the for nearly 3years(OC) and Halifax have been in Default for nearly 3 years

 

have read undercovers elsa attachment so selling the debt whilst in dispute not a good option to fight

 

Should it be a PROVE IT letter,or do I start a CCA all over again with 1st credit????

 

Thankyou FS

Edited July 30, 2011 by firstship

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi Firstship,

How's this to start with:

I am most suprised to hear that Halifax has sold you this disputed debt in the full knowledge that they have admitted to me in writing that it is unenforceable by the courts as they do not have a copy of a signed agreement. They are therefore in permanent default of a formal request under s 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and as such this account cannot be enforced in court.

In view of this your threat of taking court action is misleading, as are your statements that you will obtain an attachement of earnings / send in bailiffs / get a Charging Order on my property. (Although as I rent I don't think my Landlord would be agreeable).

I feel your statements are in contravention of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations, 2008 which can be a Criminal Offence, and the OFT debt collection guidelines, and if you persist with these unfounded threats I will have no alternative but to report you to the relevant authorities.

I respectfully suggest that you return this account to the original owners, with which it remains in longstanding unresolved dispute.

 

 

(As ever, don't sign it, just type your name and squiggle your initials over the typing)

Elsa x

 

 

PS: Again for ref, I attach the CPUTR guidelines and OFT s77-79 request Guidelines

oft-cputr-guide.pdf

OFT-section77-79Requests.pdf

Edited July 30, 2011 by Undercover-Elsa

[firstship]

Elsa Many thanks for your reply ,just what I need,I will get this letter away this weekend,appreciate your time given to this thread

 

Have downloaded your attatchments for future reference

 

Regards FS

 

I sent the Undercover-Elsa letter and have received 2 replies.(1) offering 30% discount if I pay within 7 days,20% discount if I pay within 30 days etc etc

 

Letter 2 is

"We refer to your recent communication requesting a copy of the relevant agreement.

The document you have requested is retained by our client.

We will therefore advise them of your request and arrange for the document to be sent to you as soon as possible.,(the rest of the letter is of no consequence)

 

Question if this 1st Credit mob have purchased the debt why do they have to refer back to Halifax and use such phrases as,"The document I have requested is retained by our client" Surely,if they purchased the debt then Halifax is no longer their client

 

Anyway I did not ask for a copy of the relevant agreement,Halifax already state in writing they dont have one.I guess a Recon Agreement is coming my way.

 

Regards FS

[Undercover-Elsa]

Just more smoke, mirrors and sleight of hand + Template response. Now we wait.

[firstship]

Thanks Elsa,not going to reply just wait and see what surfaces

 

Thankyou FS

[firstship]

Hi... 1st Credit.Been quiet for some time,now I have received copies of statements going back to 2004 which they say I requested,I did not request anything,and they say I need to phone them on receipt,to discuss the debt.

 

My thoughts are to send all the statements back along with a letter "I did not request these statements" they refer to an account that I do not acknowledge,and it appears from previous correspondence,that you are still trying to obtain a copy of the original agreement,which going back to February 2009, Halifax could not produce,and the account was placed into dispute, which in turn means that Halifax sold you an account that was in deep dispute, which to say the least is a very doubtful practice.

 

Any thoughts on the way forward

 

FS

[42man]

It seems 1st Credit have bought a lot of these Halifax accounts, there are about 3 or 4 others in the stat demand stage which is quite worrying....

[firstship]

Hi 42man,sorry I am being thick what is stat demand stage and quiet worrying

 

 

thanks FS

[Dotty50]

Hi Firstship

 

You will find plenty of threads about Statutory Demands on here, I haven't read any for a while so perhaps 42man can assist.

I am receiving daily calls on land and mobile from these pests!

 

Have you got some links 42man please?

 

I haven't responded to 1st credit yet but if they are issuing SD's I would like to be prepared!

[firstship]

Hi Dotty thanks have had a read on Stat Demands,has'nt reached the SD stage yet with 1stCredit,they have just been quiet from middle of last year,at which time they said they would approach the OC to obtain a copy of the Agreement,which I know does not exist,confirmed in writing by the OC.Then out of the blue I get copies of all statements going back 6 years which they say I asked for,but did'nt.,no copy of any agreement though.

 

I hope it just stays like this,no agreement

 

Thanks FS

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi Firstship,

The fact that you don't own property should make a stat demand pretty pointless...except as a debt threat tool which of course they've been censured for previously.

If they pester you again just remind them that Hx are still in default of a CCA Request and you have written confirmation that they cannot produce an agreement. Mention that you don't own any property if they start threatening Stat Demands, CCJ's or Charging Orders, and suggest that as Hx were fully aware that this was a seriously disputed debt they should either return it to them or stop making spurious threats and close the account.

 

Elsa x

[firstship]

Elsa Many thanks for your reply,I like the approach you suggest ,should they start pestering again

 

Regards FS

[firstship]

1st Credit have already started and threatened court and have stated that as they cannot at this point produce an Agreement,not to worry as in Court they do not have to produce a Copy of the original Agreement with my signature,it will be sufficient to produce a copy of the Original Agreement without my signature,.I think this is untrue.

 

My only concern is that certain courts are happy with statements,and a recon agreement

 

Any thoughts

 

The above was the result of a phone call from 1stcredit,I stated that is the only conversation we will have,in future everything must be in writing.

 

FS

[42man]

Well let's hope that what they provide is correct especially in light of the Kotecha vs Phoenix case....