They couldn't find the original CCA in over a year, now they say they may reconstitute one!

[Leightonx1]

Hello Everyone,

 

Could use a little advice, I've been dealing with CL Finance for some time now, they ignored numerous requests for a copy of the CCA and just continued sending treats after leaving small gaps between my letters. I reported them to the FO because of this and today I received a letter saying they don't agree with my complaint and after over a year of requests and now liaising with the OC to get a copy of the CCA or a reconstructed copy.

 

This reconstructed copy concerns me, I have a hunch the original doesn't exist and even if it did it probably wouldn't have the pre-described terms within a signed agreement as I never signed one being an online application from 2004-2005. What's to say they can't reconstitute one anyway with everything they need. Could really use some helpful advice.

 

Thank You!

[Housed]

If they take you to court im pretty sure they will need the original.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Many DCAs will quote Carey, claiming that the judgement allows them to provide a reconstruction. And so it does, which is why it makes them moist. If only the DCAs had read the whole thing, they'd have seen that the reconstructed agreement can only be used in response to a CCA request; they still need to produce the original in court.

 

If they send a reconstructed agreement, write back asking them to confirm whether or not the original exists, and if it does, why have they failed to produce it, and if it doesn't, why have they mentioned court action knowing that they cannot bring proceedings, which is an offence under CPUTR.

[Ruprecht]

The reconstruction needs to be a true copy, they can't just make it up.

 

In order for it to be a true copy of the executed agreement, to be 100% sure, they'd need to have seen the original agreement.

 

Anything less than this is hearsay evidence, if they took you to court.

 

You'd then beat them with the CPRs to prove it is a true copy of the executed agreeement i.e. they have someone elses agreement around the same time as yours but not yours etc? Why?

 

You'd get them to admit if they had it or not using CPR 31.14/31.15 and arrange a time to inspect the original with them. LOL

 

You'd go for no proof it contained the prescribed terms (pre April 2007) and non-compliance of the s77/s78 request. Maybe abuse of process for bringing the claim when in non-compliance of the s77/s78 request.

 

Drown them with legal costs, applications and the Civil Procedure Rules.

[miss muppet]

subbing

[Pinky69]

I would just ignore them - they don't have anything they can ask for payment on.

[angry cat]

You couldn't make it up, could you?

 

But, they will try...

[UnmoderatetheNet]

CL Finance aka LEWIS aka Cattles AKA Up a creek without a paddle

 

Desperate letters from a desperate company on the brink of being sold off and broken down into tiny little pieces.

[Little Mermaid]

subbing

[Guest Cartaphilus]

Desperate letters from a desperate company on the brink of being sold off and broken down into tiny little pieces.

 

Wonder what happens when they do ... be at the hands of DCAs and threats of bailifs themselves?