1st credits interpretation on enforcement action

[davidd]

Evening all,

I'm looking for some pointers to place into a reply to 1st credit and i'm confident we can come up with plenty to keep the quiet for good.

I sent 1st credit a letter requesting a CCA using the usual procedure on the forum.

They couldn't find the agreement, as i suspected.

I received the obligatory we are looking in to this but please continue paying as we will find it and get back to you.

I recieved the letter just yesterday and it got me thinking as to what to say on a stern reply.

I know the OFT are publishing a report in mid January that will be altered as a consequence of the CARTEL test cases in Manchester.

I'm looking for some advice as to what to put into a reply or do i wait until the OFT report comes out?

I've included the letter for you guys to peruse.

Any guidance and assistance always

cheers

Dave:?

 

final response.pdf

[twofoot]

They are saying they can do what they like even if they can't produce a CCA to take you to court.

Why pay them to trash your CRA file.

What do you lose if you don't pay.

I'd send them a letter to tell them that you cannot see any benefit to paying an alleged debt that they cannot prove in court.

[lickthewallfatboy]

1st crud are particularly thick

[davidd]

I agree wholeheartedly with the you guys. Surely there is nothing to gain in savaging my mums Credit file when all i'm doing is asking for a 'true copy' of the original agreement. There must be some recent precedents, legislation or even guidance from the OFT, when published, that protects the consumer from these sharks. There was PPI on the loan agreement as my mum took cover out on it all the time so If i could get the agreement back i could pay the loan off and possibly have some spare cash for my mum to play with without the letters and phone calls you get from these mongrels. She is 67 after all.

I'm going to keep reading and i'll find something pointers and get a letter away but i'll update the post with material points before i send it off next week.

cheers

[babybear39]

It is rumoured that certain DCAs trash credit files as revenge on accounts that are unenforceable

[lilly white]

good day.

 

just write to them and call it.

 

this will give you some help

 

 

Dear Sir or Madam,

 

In respect of the credit agreement you have not disclosed on the XXXXXXX 2009

 

after seeking legal advice from a Consumer Credit Law specialist I can comment as follows.

 

The agreement you need to disclosed will be improperly executed,it will not compliant primarily with s61(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the consequences are that as it stands the any agreement is unenforceable and requires an order of the court pursuant to section 65(1) CCA 1974 to be remedy this problem. You are invited to make such an application for the said order.

 

hope this get you started

 

Also put this recent court case carey v others.

1. Accordingly, non-compliance with the relevant regulations is capable of being cured upon application by the court unless the document signed by the debtor did not contain the Prescribed Terms. In such a case the non-compliance cannot be cured and, in the words of Lord Hoffman in Dimond v Lovell [2002] 1 AC 384 at p397F, the agreement is "irredeemably unenforceable".
   

 

end with this

 

I would invite your proposals to settle my dispute.

 

 

Edited January 3, 2010 by lilly white

[Huff&Puff]

They might be better off taking their legal advice from a solicitor that is capable of stringing together a grammatical sentence

 

reached the conclusion that unenforceability does not mean that extinguished.

This just confirms my view that it is mostly best to just ignore DCAs altogether, it's impossible to have either an intelligent, or even intelligible, dialogue with them.

[Lapchien66]

The crudites are fightling for their lives, the sooner they get wiped off the map the better. The author of the letter from 1st crud thinks he is a decent wordsmith who can use snippets of transcripts taken mostly out of context in order to baffle their 'clients', but we know better

[lookinforinfo]

Just tell them that you have passed their letter to the OFT for comment. 1st Credit have already had problems with OFT and their interpretation of McGuffick v RBS does not agree with that of the OFT-

 

BBC News - Lenders warned not to mislead customers over debts

 

The judge said it was legal for lenders to take other steps to get their money back, such as demanding repayment of the loan, issuing a default notice, threatening legal action, and even starting legal proceedings.

 

But the OFT said it might take a dim view of these tactics.

 

"For the purposes of considering whether a company is fit to hold a consumer credit licence, the OFT can take into account any practices which we consider to be oppressive, misleading or improper, whether they are unlawful or not," an OFT official said.

 

The OFT's draft guidance says: "No communications or requests for payment should in any way threaten court action or other enforcement of the debt where the creditor or owner is aware that it cannot and will not be entitled so to enforce the agreement."

 

"The creditor or owner should make it clear in communications to the debtor that the debt is in fact unenforceable," it adds.

 

The guidance goes on to warn that: "To mislead debtors into making payment may in certain circumstances amount to an unfair commercial practice under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008."

 

Would be good if the OFT finally found the bottle to remove their Consumer Credit Licence.

 

I doubt they will, but you should receive a grovelling letter from 1sr Credit that they will leave you in peace until they find your contract without having to write anymore than I indicated on the first line of this post.

Inadvisable therefore to reclaim the PPI as you would be acknowledging that you do have an account with them.

Edited January 3, 2010 by lookinforinfo

[davidd]

Thanks everyone one for the constructive replies. I've made a start on a letter around what lilly white has mentioned and thanks to looking for info for stopping me from mentioning PPi on the letter - good shout.The first paragarph will mention a letter going to the OFT as they may have an opinion that certainly differs from 1st Credits on enforcement.All good material. I'll place the letter on for perusal and comments before i send it off .Thanks again.

[PGH7447]

subbing