1st crud - new tactic!! or just run out of ideas

[PGH7447]

History

 

Got an alledged account with these fools

 

sent CCA got back an application form and 2 sets of T&C's (not attached)

 

Doing the right thing offered a payment plan if they deducted the charges and ppi

 

got a No back but would accept the payment plan on proof of I&E

 

I said No thanks account now in dispute due to unenforceable application form.

 

Today received what can only be described as a veiled threat.

 

Dear Delinquent (Thats Me)

 

"You have been provided with an EXACT copy of the credit agreement (that would be the application form then) which EXCEEDS our obligation to supply a true copy and therefore the matter has now been referred to LCS solictiors (next desk then). No default situation is currently in effect and we are entitled to seek enforcement in any event (!!). LCS will be in contact with you in due course. (Scary)

 

In the meantime if you wish we would be obliged to recieve your comments upon the non compliant elements of the documentation we have supplied as we consider the breaches you allege to be inaccurate. !!( sorry Dear your the SUPPOSED EXPERTS you tell me why an applicatio form is not a credit agreement)

 

yours 1st crud compliance monkey

 

---

 

To be honest I cant be bothered to deal with these idiots anymore, so any thoughts on getting shut of them for good.

Edited December 4, 2009 by PGH7447

[hungrybear]

There is little point playing letter tennis with this 'people'. The just send rude rubbish back with selectively misquoted extracts from the cca.

 

Here's the last letter I sent them - although I sent it by e-mail because they arnt worth a stamp!

 

This was in response of been sent to the pre-litigation team if I didnt pay up, which I took to mean next draw down in the filing cabinet!

 

(havent heard from them since)

 

Today I have received your letter of xx October 2009. I have checked my records and I have no record of receiving the earlier letters to which you refer. OK so I threw them in the bin I admit it

 

However, to date I have not received any communication or documentation from 1st Credit which provides any legally enforceable proof whatsoever that I owe any money to this company. I am certainly not going to pay any money on a debt I do not recognise just because you or any of you colleagues think I should.

 

Consequently, I am not sure what appropriate reply I should give at this time. Perhaps you can clarify this for me?

 

No doubt if you write again, you will enclose definative legally enforceable proof that there is any matter that I should acknowledge and/or correspond with 1st Credit over. If you do not then I fail to see what reply I could appropriately give without wasting my time and yours.

[ODC]

I agree with you PGH.

 

What is the point of wasting your time corresponding with these eejits. Its not up to you to explain the law to them. They have enough overpaid monkeys to do that for them

[PGH7447]

I agree with you PGH.

 

What is the point of wasting your time corresponding with these eejits. Its not up to you to explain the law to them. They have enough overpaid monkeys to do that for them

 

cheers ODC and hungrybear.

 

this has dragged on for months, the thing is I did offer a reasonable solution that these fools completely disregarded.

 

which unlike the CSA article in the guardian, we do wish to pay but not under duress, if you are reading this Ms de tute and Mr nathoo.

 

sort your F******* companies out

 

so 1st crud bring on your pet solictior at the next desk:evil:

[hungrybear]

cheers ODC and hungrybear.

 

this has dragged on for months, the thing is I did offer a reasonable solution that these fools completely disregarded.

 

which unlike the CSA article in the guardian, we do wish to pay but not under duress, if you are reading this Ms de tute and Mr nathoo.

 

sort your F******* companies out

 

so 1st crud bring on your pet solictior at the next desk:evil:

 

 

I now see where it all went wrong for you in dealing with 1st!

 

- the very same company that told me in writing that the CCA was not relevant to my debt and when I asked what legislation it did come under they said that 'that was a matter for me to sort out'. So i've decided that they are now covered by the Ignore Act 2009.

 

And another thing. If they owed you money and you could not prove it in court, how much do you thing you would get?

[lilly white]

ok well we could go on the attack court here we come or we wait for them to make their move.

 

i do hope their bus stop is wet.

 

best regards lilly

[diddydicky]

it is very obliging of them to confirm that what they sent you is the EXACT copy of your CCA

 

therefore if it is not compliant then they can now not produce any other document that purports to be the CCA to a court so they have "fillited their own donkey"

 

however i disagree that it should be ignored- belt and braces

 

just a simple response

 

dear sirs

 

thank you for your letter of XXXX I note the contents.

 

Thank you for confirming that the enclosed "pre contractual application form" is in fact relied upon by you as a properly executed credit card agreement

 

It is not for me to give you legal advice on your documentation and perhaps if you are unable to see the defects in the agreement you should not be in possession of a consumer credit licence

 

I do not intend to engage in circular arguments on this matter therefore all future correspondence , save for service will be filed unanswered

 

Y F

[zazen.warrior]

Dear Sirs

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated *** ; I refer you to my letter of *** which was my final response in this matter.

 

Kind regards

 

Delinquent

 

 

If you must respond at all

Edited December 5, 2009 by zazen.warrior

[hungrybear]

it is very obliging of them to confirm that what they sent you is the EXACT copy of your CCA

 

therefore if it is not compliant then they can now not produce any other document that purports to be the CCA to a court so they have "fillited their own donkey"

 

however i disagree that it should be ignored- belt and braces

 

just a simple response

 

dear sirs

 

thank you for your letter of XXXX I note the contents.

 

Thank you for confirming that the enclosed "pre contractual application form" is in fact relied upon by you as a properly executed credit card agreement

 

It is not for me to give you legal advice on your documentation and perhaps if you are unable to see the defects in the agreement you should not be in possession of a consumer credit licence

 

I do not intend to engage in circular arguments on this matter therefore all future correspondence , save for service will be filed unanswered

 

Y F

 

100% class.

[diddydicky]

the important thing is a response

 

clearly there is no need to respond to comments or issues that have already been dealt with , however some sort of response is always advisable if a new point is thrown up

 

otherwise when costs applications are made the other side may well refer the judge to loads of unanswered communications

 

it also helps get the judge onside if he can see that you have acted promptly in addressing communications and trying to resolve the matter outside of the court process

[PGH7447]

diddy, I take your point and will use your letter kindly suplied

 

[nick20045]

And do not forget to send them a Christmas Card.

 

Well somebody has to make them happy and you drew the shortest straw. :D

[PGH7447]

If I can find one with scrooge on the front

[postggj]

And do not forget to send them a Christmas Card.

 

Well somebody has to make them happy and you drew the shortest straw. :D

 

 

offer them a payment

 

what card will that be sir

 

a christmas card

[nick20045]

offer them a payment

 

what card will that be sir

 

a christmas card

Why not post that in the thread about Cheekiness to DCA's. See if members can block their telephone lines with that gag. Its brilliant.

 

Ha ha ha ha :lol:

 

Eehhhhh dont we half love them.

[PGH7447]

OK letter away, no doubt I will get a response on the 23 december giving me 7 days to comply - or die:D

[hungrybear]

OK letter away, no doubt I will get a response on the 23 december giving me 7 days to comply - or be assimilated

[PGH7447]

These fools have now unleashed "Drum Roll Please"

 

LCS Solicitors "quaking in my boots about now"

 

Brief summary of their threat-o-gram

 

Dear PGH

 

We refer to the above and write to confirm that our client (1st Crud) has instructed us to proceed legal action (Shock Horror) to recover the debt owing to 1st Crud (sorry numpty dont owe 1st Crud anything, owe the OC but that is a different matter)

 

Then the rant on about carey v HSBC and how I should familiarise myself with this case - Impertanant barstewards

 

Then this strange paragraph

 

"We therefore look forward to hearing from me with proposals for payment etc tec" - then - "If we do not hear from you by said date we are instructe to proceed with a letter before claim"

 

Would that be another Letter before action then?

 

Thoughts anyone

[the_shadow]

These fools have now unleashed "Drum Roll Please"

 

LCS Solicitors "quaking in my boots about now"

 

Brief summary of their threat-o-gram

 

Dear PGH

 

We refer to the above and write to confirm that our client (1st Crud) has instructed us to proceed legal action (Shock Horror) to recover the debt owing to 1st Crud (sorry numpty dont owe 1st Crud anything, owe the OC but that is a different matter)

 

Then the rant on about carey v HSBC and how I should familiarise myself with this case - Impertanant barstewards

 

Then this strange paragraph

 

"We therefore look forward to hearing from me with proposals for payment etc tec" - then - "If we do not hear from you by said date we are instructe to proceed with a letter before claim"

 

Would that be another Letter before action then?

 

Thoughts anyone

 

Hmm you might want to write back thanking them for misquoting case law at you.

 

As I'm sure they know Carey v HSBC is on assumed facts at present and not gone to full trial yet, also its in regards to s78 responses and not governing enforceability under s127(3) as would be the case here and the biggy........... Waksman was keen to point out that this was the debtor taking a bank to court to the burden of proof fell solely on the debtor.

 

In any event if this is an old credit card then the s78 response hasnt been complied with unless they've sent you all t&c variations, tell them to read the same case if they dont believe you .

 

S.

[PGH7447]

Hi Shadow, interesting very interesting, must consider a suitable reply:D

[PGH7447]

Seems I am one of the lucky ones, other caggers are getting their accounts past to muckyhall to deal with, seen 2 today so far.

 

Joy:)

[lickthewallfatboy]

add one more here

 

You know the're completely screwed when they try to rope in that bunch of total losers