Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Honestly you are all amazing on this site, thank you so much for your help and time. ill keep an eye out and only return when i receive a claim letter for sure also, i updated my address with amex and tsb before i even missed payments. the initial address was my family home but i dont reside there. to avoid a bombardment of letters there i have now updated my address, will they send all threats etc to the new address? Or old address?   do you reccomend i send both tsb and amex my update in address via a letter?
    • Your point 4 deals with that and puts them to strict proof .....but realistically they are not in a position to state that within their particulars they were not the creditor at the time of default but naturally assume the OC would have...so always worth challenging and if you get a DJ who knows his onions on the day may ask for further evidence from the OC internal accounts system. 
    • I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory. Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance
    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Halifax cc Reconstituted CCA missing prescribed terms - what now?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4738 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Cant seem to make it any bigger via Photobucket, may just be being extremely stupid..... - any ideas?

 

If you have MS Word 2007 or higher, you could paste the picture into a Word document and then save it as a pdf document (and then attach it to a post).

 

I do this with most of mine and the pdf will automatically display at 145%. This might work?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Credit limit is a prescribed term and one that should be agreed at the date of signature. To send you this information later is to avoid the consumer credit act.

 

I would suggest a response as below (amend as neccassary). These issues are very stressful and complicated to defend though and if you want to know how this is likely to play out in court see my thread and my problems with disclosure:

 

Following the recent ruling in the Supreme court, 7th July 2010, Southern Pacific Securities 05-2 Plc (in substitution for Southern Pacific Personal Loans Limited) (Respondent) v Walker and another (Appellants) The need for prescribed terms to be present in any agreement have been reaffirmed at the highest level. I quote:

 

12. The Act and the Regulations distinguish between ‘prescribed terms’ and

‘required terms’. In the case of an agreement predating 6 April 2007 such as the

agreement which is the subject of this appeal, by section 127(3) of the Act a failure

properly to include a prescribed term in the agreement renders the agreement

wholly unenforceable, whereas a failure properly to include a required term merely

means that the agreement is enforceable only by court order under section 65(1) of

the Act. In the case of the agreement in this case, the prescribed terms were: a term

stating the amount of credit (Agreements Regulations reg 6(1) and Sch 6, para 2), a

term stating the rate of any interestlink3.gif on the credit to be provided under the

agreement (ibid Sch 6, para 4) and a term stating how the debtor is to discharge his

obligations under the agreement to make the repayments (ibid Sch 6, para 5).

 

In your letter dated xxx you state that the credit limit was not on the agreement signed. It is not open to creditors to supply this information later and it would not be fair on me as a customer to bind me into an agreement without a clear understanding of the terms this would include.

 

You have confirmed that what you have sent me you believe to be a true copy of the credit agreement that exists in relation to this account. As you have sent this document in response to my requests under Section 78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, then this statement by you is now binding on you as per section 172 of the Act.

Section 172 states:

172 Statements by creditor or owner to be binding (1) A statement by a creditor or owner is binding on him if given under— section 77(1), section 78(1), section 79(1), section 97(1), section 107(1)©, section 108(1)©, or section 109(1)©. THIS MEANS THAT THE DOCUMENT YOU HAVE SENT IS THE ONLY DOCUMENT YOU MAY NOW RELY ON IN ANY ATTEMPT AT ENFORCING THIS ALLEGED DEBT. Any further documentation you may present is irrelevant as you did not provide it in response to my lawful request.

 

 

This debt is completely unenforceable under S127 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 is clear on what agreements must contain in order to be enforceable, even in court. At the very least, an agreement must contain the following within the signature document to be enforceable, even in court:

A credit limit or a statement as to how this will be determined.

An APR.

A schedule of repayments.

These are the prescribed terms as required by the Act and subsequent Regulations.

The agreement you have sent me does not include all of the information needed to make it enforceable, and therefore it is completely unenforceable under Section 127 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

If you deny that the document you have sent me fails to comply with the Consumer Credit Act 1974. In that case, given the facts I have outlined above, perhaps you could direct me to all of the prescribed and required terms in the agreement you have sent me. I think you will find that they are not there.

I expect Halifax to comply with my outstanding request within 7 days to produce a copy of an executable agreement.After that I will consider that the above matter is closed and that you will no longer pursue the alleged debt. If you are insisting that the non enforceable document, that you have supplied, is the only alleged agreement in your possession, then I would suggest that the best course of action would be to immediately set the balance of the above account number to zero, and remove any adverse data that you may have registered with credit reference agencies.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/251664-g-bank-scotland-scm-7.html

[/font]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Halifax don't need to show the credit limit on cards as they are classed as a running account, they only have to show it on fixed sum credit agreements.

 

:eek:Wot!

 

AFAIK The credit limit is one of the prescribed terms required by the 1974 CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

:eek:Wot!

 

AFAIK The credit limit is one of the prescribed terms required by the 1974 CCA

 

It is, but they don't have to have a set figure on the CCA for a running account and can have on there that the credit limit will be determined by the creditor from time to time and notified to the debtor, or words similar to that.

 

It's only fixed sum credit agreements (loans) that they have to have an actual amount on the CCA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesnt show repayment schedule either and isnt PT357 court case against EGG cc based on the fact that the prescribed term 'Credit Limit' is exactly that?

 

It shows your repayment schedule on 2.2 where it tells you what you have to pay each month.

 

I'm not sure what PT357's court case is with Egg but the case I have heard a lot about against Egg is the wording of 'approved limit' instead of 'credit limit'.

 

That wouldn't matter with this one as yours says credit limit anyway.

 

You might want to get it checked out on the Debt Collection Industry forum on this site which is busier for more opinions but this to me is enforceable, however I hope I'm wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It does but I believe the judge will allow them to sign it in front of him to make it legally binding.

 

 

So you believe that getting a bod from the Halifax to sign a reconstituted agreement in front of a Judge moments before the trial begins and some 4 years after they made the agreement makes everything tickety boo?

Link to post
Share on other sites

how can signing a reconstituted copy in front of a judge 4 years on from the date an agreement is claimed to have started be binding??

 

Aside from the issue of this not being a true copy anyway, surely English contract law does not allow for this?? As far as I am aware a contract has to be signed on the date listed on the agreement otherwise it is not binding from that date.

 

I have worked with a lot of finanical contracts in past employment and lawyers I have worked with have always insisted that any English law docs are signed on the date listed in the contract, even if it is stated as an "on or about" date rather than a discrete date. Otherwise the contract cannot be deemed to have taken effect and contracts cannot be backdated without the explicit agreement of both parties.

 

So surely if they sign an agreement 4 years on, it can only take effect from that date. Also, couldn't the alleged debtor rescind the contract as well based on the fact that it has not taken affect yet?

 

Drederick - what are you basing your view on? What legal points are you aware of that support your conclusion?

 

thanks

Edited by nodefaults2010
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your replies, however if it ever got as far as going to Court, I would use a CPR 31.4 request for a copy of the original agreement in its original form along with any default notice and assignment notice - which we haven't had yet.

 

I would tend to agree that if they cannot produce the original agreement in Court with original signatures - then no case surely, how can they get away with making up an agreement and then signing it in front of a judge - surely that is then a new agreement and one that we had never agreed to???

Link to post
Share on other sites

how can signing a reconstituted copy in front of a judge 4 years on from the date an agreement is claimed to have started be binding??

 

Aside from the issue of this not being a true copy anyway, surely English contract law does not allow for this?? As far as I am aware a contract has to be signed on the date listed on the agreement otherwise it is not binding from that date.

 

I have worked with a lot of finanical contracts in past employment and lawyers I have worked with have always insisted that any English law docs are signed on the date listed in the contract, even if it is stated as an "on or about" date rather than a discrete date. Otherwise the contract cannot be deemed to have taken effect and contracts cannot be backdated without the explicit agreement of both parties.

 

So surely if they sign an agreement 4 years on, it can only take effect from that date. Also, couldn't the alleged debtor rescind the contract as well based on the fact that it has not taken affect yet?

 

Drederick - what are you basing your view on? What legal points are you aware of that support your conclusion?

 

thanks

 

From the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1974/pdf/ukpga_19740039_en.pdf

 

65.--(1) An improperly-executed regulated agreement is enforceable against the debtor or hirer on an order of the court only.

 

There's more about it in the 4th post in the thread I've linked below, btw most on here that have more knowledge about CCA's than I do believe that a stamp is acceptable as a creditors signature.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/162851-consumer-credit-agreements-guide.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks Drederick.

 

it does state in that 4th post from the link you sent that an agreement would probably not be enforceable if there was no signaturelink3.gif (copy of unsigned application form). I presume this refers to the debtor's signature though.

 

Although, it seems a bit of a gray area and a hanging judge may choose to interpret this in such a way that the agreement is still enforceable. Surely if this went to appeal it would be a good case for being overturned though?

 

Anyway, this thread you referenced again points out that a reconstructed agreement should not suffice in court if it is argued against properly, hence whether they signed it or not in front of the judge should be irrelevant if theey cannot produce the original or a true copy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks Drederick.

 

it does state in that 4th post from the link you sent that an agreement would probably not be enforceable if there was no signaturelink3.gif (copy of unsigned application form). I presume this refers to the debtor's signature though.

 

Although, it seems a bit of a gray area and a hanging judge may choose to interpret this in such a way that the agreement is still enforceable. Surely if this went to appeal it would be a good case for being overturned though?

 

Anyway, this thread you referenced again points out that a reconstructed agreement should not suffice in court if it is argued against properly, hence whether they signed it or not in front of the judge should be irrelevant if theey cannot produce the original or a true copy.

 

That thread was from before the Carey vs HSBC test case, since then people have been taken to court with only a reconstituted agreement.

 

Bankruptcy and Living With it • View thread - reconstituted CCA - to be used in court against me

 

I think what you will find is that if the OP takes this further Halifax will reply saying that they've got the agreement saved to microfiche which is what they've printed off to form the reconstituted agreement.

 

The best bet here is for Halifax to make a mess of the default notice so they can only reclaim any arrears.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if they take you to court, request a CCA under a CPR request...if they cannot produce a signed original they do not have anything to enforce.

 

an incorrect default and termination notice will definitely add weight to your case though and limit any amount owed to arrears vs damages for loss of credit reputation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...