DCA quoting McGuffick v RBS Judgement -where do I stand now

[lamb909]

Morning

 

After months (maybe a couple of years of receiving the same standrad reply every month from a DCA (they are chasing up the copy of agreement) and not demanding money, have just received this letter today

 

With reference to your data request under the CCA 1974 we would like to draw your attention to the recent ruling in the case of McGuffick V RBS judgement dated 6 October 2009 in relation to "what is considered enforcement" the judgement stated that the bringing of proceedings is not enforcement. It follow that demanding paymeny is a step taken prior to the commencement of proceedings and therefore not considered enforcement.

 

Should you want to view the Judgement in its entirety it is easily accessible via the internet

 

Whilst we may not be able to enforce the agreement until the documnetatuin is provided the monies remain outstanding. The industry guidance from the Creditr Services Association states tat the agreement has not been made illegal or void due to the original lenders failure to provide the requested documentation at this time. The underlying obligation to repay remains intact.

 

In view of the above ruling the account will be returned to our collections team for collection activity to resume.

 

We will ontinue to follow up your recent copy of the required documentation withe the original lender. When this becomes available we will forward a copy to you.

 

We will update you on any develoopments in 21 days if there are no developments beforehand. Should you not wish to receive these updates please advise us accordingly.

 

Please contact our collections department to discuss the repayment options available to you.

 

I havent been on here for a while so not sure if this is happening everywhere, is it? Can they take me to court and am I likely to receive this sort of thing from all my creditors? Sorry for all the questions but dont really understand it so if any kind person could help, would be muchly greatful, ta

[cerberusalert]

I havent been on here for a while so not sure if this is happening everywhere, is it? Can they take me to court

No not unless they produce an enforceable CCA. They are using 'smoke & mirrors' by quoting that case. The judge said that asking for payment or marking your credit file is not regarded as enforcement.

 

They've admitted in their letter that they cannot take legal action,

Whilst we may not be able to enforce the agreement until the documnetatuin is provided the monies remain outstanding.

Equally you can tell them to bog off.

[PGH7447]

they do like clutching at straws - dont they

[dpac123]

Hi Lamb909,

 

I got this same letter today and wondered how accurate it was. I suppose the question is "if they have the agreement, then why not send it?" I asked for my agreement about 3 months ago and get letters every 3 weeks from Hillesden saying "we will update you in 3 weeks".

 

I don't think they can enforce anything, but I would be grateful for some pointers on how to respond so that I don't get harrassing phonecalls and threatening letters again.

 

Any ideas anybody?

 

Thanks

[summerbreeze]

Snap ..I got one too.

 

They have been looking for the CCA for over 12 months

[dpac123]

Any ideas what to write back?

[cerberusalert]

Don't waste postage on the muppets, they are trying to grind you down.

[veryweary]

Laughed out loud when my OH received same letter from Hillesden. Must be getting desperate, and have sent out a bulk mailshot of begging letters in the hope that someone contacts them and can be misled into giving them a payment.

 

And do they really think that we're going to be influenced by the industry guidelines of the Credit Services Association?

 

It could mean a small flurry of begging calls from their threat call centre for a short period, until they realise they're wasting their time and money.

 

Won't be sending them a reply and have just blocked their numbers on the Truecall machine so won't be disturbed by their calls either. They'll just become another sad statistic on the monthly harassment figures log.

[tronny]

Yep, I received one today aswell after 13 months of waiting for them to produce my cca.

 

 

With reference to your data request under the CCA 1974 we would like to draw your attention to the recent ruling in the case of McGuffick V RBS judgement dated 6 October 2009 in relation to "what is considered enforcement" the judgement stated that the bringing of proceedings is not enforcement. It follows that demanding payment is a step taken prior to the commencement of proceedings and therefore not considered enforcement.

 

Is it just me or does the above contradict itself??????

Edited February 22, 2010 by tronny
adding of text and correcting typos

[harrassed senior]

It may not be construed as 'enforcement', but what about harrassment?

[Huff&Puff]

The underlying obligation to repay remains intact.

 

There would only be such an obligation to repay if they had a valid agreement. Without the agreementthere is no obligation to do anything at all.

 

And I don't believe that McGuffick stated that they can pursue disputed alleged debts, so if they do start chasing again, then you should all report them to TS and the OFT.

[count orlok]

Seeing as how they are quoting CSA guidlines, I would be inclined to write back to them quoting this from the CSA website:

 

Q. I have been told that if I ask for a copy of my agreement and include a £1 fee and this is not supplied my agreement is written off, is this true?

No, If you ask the creditor for a copy agreement (with a £1 fee) and this is not provided within 12 working days the agreement is not written off. It does mean that the creditor must stop collection on the agreement until one is later provided.

 

Drawing particular attention to the part i have outlined in red.

[Pinky69]

This is their latest ploy. As usual the member of the CSA with the brain cell was absent when the dearies decided they would try to be clever. Idiots.

[chilli_bird]

i got one letter today and all that when through my head was oh no,,,,please leave me alone.

What will happen now coz it says that

 

in view of the ruling the account will be returned to our team for collection activity to resume...

 

they will continue to follow up the request for a copy of the requested documentation with the oroginal lender and when this becomes available we will send you a copy.

 

how do i ignore it now.

[summerbreeze]

i got one letter today and all that when through my head was oh no,,,,please leave me alone.

What will happen now coz it says that

 

in view of the ruling the account will be returned to our team for collection activity to resume...

 

they will continue to follow up the request for a copy of the requested documentation with the oroginal lender and when this becomes available we will send you a copy.

 

how do i ignore it now.

 

Well I am just filing the letter with all the others.

 

The Mcguffick judgement was not a magic potion to suddenly make all those missing CCAs reappear was it ?

 

If they dont have the CCA they can threaten and beg all they want but they wont get anywhere

[PGH7447]

simple put it in file 13, they cant do nowt without the agreement, its all a con on their part

[twinkle1977]

Hi

 

Yes - received this from Hillesden myself today and posted about it.

 

What i'd really like to do is respond with a "here's my middle finger" but wouldn't know what to say.

 

Again, I feel a response is needed as they mentioned their collections department will be in touch to resume collections. Good old DLC/Hillesden...

[chilli_bird]

If the call me or write to me shall I just ignore all correspondences.

 

Think i can do that

[summerbreeze]

As far as I am concerned they can Faccenda off [ oops will I get cagbotted now?]

[cerberusalert]

As Father Jack would say;

 

[Pinky69]

This is where they stand...........

 

DCA quoting McGuffick v RBS Judgement -where do I stand now

 

in the middle of nowhere and the nearest cess pit as usual. :grin:

[chilli_bird]

There would only be such an obligation to repay if they had a valid agreement. Without the agreementthere is no obligation to do anything at all.

 

And I don't believe that McGuffick stated that they can pursue disputed alleged debts, so if they do start chasing again, then you should all report them to TS and the OFT.

 

 

No Offence but the last time i tried to speak to the OFT the said that if the monies is owed then the DLC is only collecting on behalf of the bank and there was nowt they could do.

Not sure if i approached it properly or do through to the correct ppl

[Pinky69]

The OFT do not deal with individual complaints and would have no idea whether the money was owed or not so they were in no position to comment. DCAs cannot pursue debts which have no agreements and are in dispute. Matters such as misleading letters are very much the business of the OFT and should be reported to them every time. Every report is another nail in the DCAs coffins.

[chilli_bird]

Oh OK i get it now. So if they keep on pursuing me with misleading letter like the one everybody is getting i can report them to the OFT. Right?

[pookeymonkey]

Just got in and Mrs Pookey has got one of these today - how we laughed!!

 

What a pathetic attempt- things must be getting desperate for Hillesden.

 

And to think they quote the Credit Services Association as some kind of authority:lol::lol:

 

We certainly wont be wasting a stamp on this lot.

 

Pookey