who says when an account is no longer in dispute?

[BARFLY]

have a credit card account that has been in dispute for nearly three years. now. the OC defaulted on a section 78 request by only supplying an application form lacking any prescribed terms and statement of account. no original terms and conditions. the account has since been sold to a DCA that refuses to acknowledge that the account is still in dispute, and was in dispute when sold to them, against OFT guidelines. they state that the OC had sent me a final response letter denying that they had defaulted under the section 78 request and suggesting that i contact the FOS. i didn't contact the FOS as they cannot, i believe, rule on legal documents. i suggested that the OC take me to court and they never did.

 

Anyway the DCA are pressing on regardless as if no dispute ever existed. so my question is: who determines whether an account is in legal dispute? surely it must be the court. or is it the OFT? not the OC or the DCA who will obviously state that they met their obligations when they have clearly not. neither OC or DCA have ever provided the original terms and conditions and that is the dispute.

 

another point with this is the "application form" makes no reference to terms and conditions. are they still obliged to send the original terms and conditions if this is the case under a section 78 request?

[dpick]

I have had this with 2 creditors both say no dispute I say there is as no prescribed terms I have written to both saying take me to court I keep a copy of this letter and if any DCA contacts me I demand an e-mail address as I wont waste money on a stamp and send them a copy of the letter. It seems to say a lot that no one has attempted court proceedings for the last 3 years since I started doing this.

 

dpick

[Mozz1]

they state that the OC had sent me a final response letter

 

Do they have to send this to legally claim that a dispute is not valid? Or can they carry on collecting / instructing DCAs without sending such a letter? I had a so-called "formal response" to a complaint I made to capQuest but have had nothing official from the OC whom I have disputed the account with.

 

who determines whether an account is in legal dispute? surely it must be the court. or is it the OFT? not the OC or the DCA

 

Good question. Presumably if you get FOS involved they cannot end the dispute? But you say Fos cannot adjudicate on legal agreements? But you could get FOS involved on getting the OC to supply you with the original T&C. Try that tactic. The OFT won't investigate individual cases. Trading Standards will though.

 

Would like to know the answer to this one myself.

 

are they still obliged to send the original terms and conditions

 

I thought they were but proving they are the originals is the problem. I was sent something that looked suspiously current from the OC but they claim they are the ones current at the time and I can't see anything to challenge them on.

[ashmk]

I would say the court.

 

You dispute, they do not, its stalemate, so you goto court and let the judge decide. Thats their job, to decide what others cannot.

 

The OC/DCA have no right to decide what is and what is not a dispute so tell them to take you to court and let the judge decide or foxtrot oscar.

[Mozz1]

Most of us want to avoid court like the plague

[BARFLY]

thanks guys.

 

this has been ongoing for nearly three years with several DCAs making a swift exit along the way. seems this DCA is banging the drum where the dispute is concerned, probably because they have purchased the account while the others were acting on behalf of the OC. you're right about the t and c's, Mozz. the ones they have provided are duplicates from 2006 and these are the originals, apparently, even though the account dates back to 2001!!!

 

i say it's black;they say it's white. over and over. i won't back down from the position that the account was indispute when they purchased it and so they are subsequently in breach of OFT guidelines. they don't like this. to say the dispute was settled with the original creditor absolves them form any transgression and allows them to carry on collection activities. are you sure the trading standards would look into this?

 

there position is: we have looked into the dipute with the OC and can see it was rejected by them and is therefore not valid and we had the right to purchase the account. therefore, we really cannot understand why you do not contact us to make some kind of arrangement to pay. you have no valid reason for denying payment.

 

of course, apart from the fact you still have no executed agreement or original t and c's.......

 

it's funny how recently the DCAs seem to include the statement "..we have included statements to show how your outstanding balance was accrued.." good for you, but i'm talking about your right to collect the outstanding balance, not whther it exists or not!

[BARFLY]

yeah, that's what i've informed them, ashmk. "we seem to have reached an impasse i believe the only solution is to put the dispute before the courts.." they haven't done so as yet. the account is for more than £10 000 and as such i believe it would be the multi-track and the expenses more for them. also the judge would hopefully be a touch more knowledgeable....

[Ebineezer]

you could get stung with paying their legal costs plus what you owe them though

[Huff&Puff]

Even if you cannot report them to the FOS, there is no reason why you shouldn't report them to Trading Standards and the OFT. That may well make them go away.

[PriorityOne]

The real bottom line is whether a CCA is enforceable or not, not whether it's still "in dispute". You say it is, they say it isn't.... so the only option open to them is to gamble on you not being a CAG member and ignorant of CCA law and take you to court.

 

In the past, I've suggested that a DCA liaise with the original creditor because the OC should have been more clear about its unenforceability/lack of paperwork before selling it.

 

[BARFLY]

maybe they're trying to convince me they haven't contravened the OFT guidelines. but you're right, the endgame is about the unenforceable "application" and they know that. and they know that i know that. and they most probably know that i take full advantage of the fabulous CAG. i'll just sit back and await the summons. fingers crossed it will not be in the next three years.

[PriorityOne]

You could always CCA them as well.... sometimes thinking outside the box can pay dividends....

 

I had a similar scenario where a DCA said that the OC had complied by sending a CCA out and they wanted my intentions for paying, etc.... so I CCA'd the DCA because surely, if the OC had complied and sent it to me, then they would have it on file to forward to the DCA upon request, wouldn't they?

 

Haven't heard anything for nearly 2 years....

[Ebineezer]

maybe they're trying to convince me they haven't contravened the OFT guidelines. but you're right, the endgame is about the unenforceable "application" and they know that. and they know that i know that. and they most probably know that i take full advantage of the fabulous CAG. i'll just sit back and await the summons. fingers crossed it will not be in the next three years.

 

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

[debt4get]

i agree with priority one..if the dca is insisting their is no dispute and you are insisting their is..then the option they have is to put it before a court...as these letters seem to have been going back and forth for some time...this is the only stance to take....i have used this effectively with most dca's 4/5 years down the line still awaiting any court papers.....if dca's know they have an agreement that is enforceable then why bother with all the threats?

[harrassed senior]

Anyway the DCA are pressing on regardless as if no dispute ever existed. so my question is: who determines whether an account is in legal dispute? surely it must be the court. or is it the OFT? not the OC or the DCA who will obviously state that they met their obligations when they have clearly not. neither OC or DCA have ever provided the original terms and conditions and that is the dispute.

 

another point with this is the "application form" makes no reference to terms and conditions. are they still obliged to send the original terms and conditions if this is the case under a section 78 request?

 

Well then, why not stop them in their tracks by issuing them with their own CCA request, I believe that this may already have been suggested. Make sure that you put in this additional sentence "If you intend to send a reconstituted copy of the CCA you must declare the reason why it has been reconstituted and if the original exists and in what form (microfiche) etc.".

 

That way they would have to stop writing to you until THEY satisfy your request, they cannot rely on keep refering you back to the OC said this, etc. the ball would be squarely in their court. If THEY cannot supply the correct paperwork they will HAVE to accept that the account is in dispute!!