Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • If I have the correct local authority check these links :    https://www.richmond.gov.uk/services/roads_and_transport/roads_and_road_works/road_and_pathway_maintenance   https://www.richmond.gov.uk/services/roads_and_transport/roads_and_road_works/road_and_pathway_maintenance/road_and_highways_obstuctions   second link has the following :   Builders' skips – check if a skip is licensed before reporting Scaffolding or hoardings Builders materials Temporary works including traffic lights - check if temporary works are scheduled before reporting Overhanging tree branches, hedges Mud/debris on the road Mixing concrete or mortar on the highway Unauthorised vendors or traders Encroachment of highway boundaries * Discharge of water onto the highway Blocking "Rights of Way" Plants and bushes Illegal signs
    • I would challenge all the way ! Check one of my posts as I had a similar issue with my local authority , tree branches and bush covering sign. Took photos same day and a week later lo and behold the branches were cut back. Not my issue the council does not maintain the highways. Looking at your photos how could you tell there were any lines? Of course the council threw it straight back so I appealed and went to the next level and submitted my photos as evidence , they backed down then although still did not admit defeat and stated it as a goodwill gesture... I got some great advice on here so don't be stressed or worried follow the guidelines on here. Either way they are going to try to force you to pay so don't give the @$$ holes an easy ride....
    • Morning Caggers. Hope everybody is safe and well.   Ok will try to make this brief as possible !  Got an early xmas gift from Minster Bay watch in York while working on a site on a retail park, Vehicle overstayed max period (2 hours) . Basically had a short contract with the NHS delivering and installing IT equipment to one of their offices based on the retail park above one of the retail stores. The signage stated two hours max parking , spoke to receptionist who said he would put me on the exclusion list while I was there. Basically has me entering at 8.12 and exit at 15.00 ( to grab some lunch )  although I was there until 6.30pm at night still working. So in theory 8.12am till 18.30pm To add into the mix the car I was driving was just purchased on the 7th Nov and the charge letter dated 10th Nov so again in theory the transfer of ownership was not in my name then , I notice on letter it states we may have obtained your details from DVLA. I actually got the V5 today stating acquired vehicle on 7th Nov   So in the letter column on left is as follows:   Charge notice no ***** Date of contravention - 10/11/2020 Vehicle reg - My current vehicle Vehicle make - - Current vehicle Vehicle model - Current vehicle  Charge value - £100 Date of issue - 20th Nov  Location - Heslington Retail Park - York - YO10 5LA   I have attached a pic of the main body of the letter they are of course offering a discount of £60 ....how jolly nice    So best course of action?   1) Tell them I was driver\owner but working for the NHS with proof of site visit and exemption and lay it on thick about being NHS worker?  (although I imagine it won't make a difference)  2) Deny all knowledge as technically I was not the owner at that point and ask them to prove it  3) Totally ignore and wait for the toilet paper...sorry threat o grams?   I have now left that contract but still have my NHS badge as proof of employment   Thanks NTD...
    • Fraudsters are using the details of firms we authorise to try to convince people that they work for a genuine, authorised firm. Find out more about this ‘clone firm’. View the full article
  • Our picks

Account in Dispute sold to Collection Agency, advice please


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3659 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

A while back I requested my CCA from Egg (via CapQuest) and eventually received the following:

 

Egg CCA pt1

Egg CCA pt2

As this did not include a copy of the terms I wrote back claiming that it wasn’t properly executed with all the prescribed terms and didn’t hear anything for almost a year from either Egg or CapQuest.

Then I received a call from Aktiv Kaptial who apparently purchased the debt from Egg. As I was not aware that my debt had been sold, whilst it was still in dispute with Egg / CapQuest, I requested a copy of my CCA from AK.

 

AK said (verbally on the phone) that the original agreement doesn't matter any more and they were desperate to get me to pay a token payment on the phone, but I refused and said i wanted proof of the debt.

 

I sent them a letter stating that Egg should not have sold my account whilst it was in dispute to which they replied, removing my account from their collection process whilst they obtained a copy of the agreement.

 

I have now received the following including a copy of the agreement, this time with a copy of Egg’s terms:

 

letter from AK

Copy of Egg CCA part 1

Copy of Egg CCA part 2

Copy of Egg terms part 1

Copy of Egg terms part 2

Copy of Egg terms part 3

 

AK’s letter states that Egg rejected my claim that the account was unenforceable, however I have never received this information from Egg or CapQuest, nor did they contact me to try and recover any more of the debt.

 

Upon perusal of the supplied agreement and terms there is no mention of a cooling off period or my rights to cancel.

 

What should my next step be?

 

Write to AK stating that Egg never told me they refused my claim, that they did not try to contact me to recover any more of the debt – further implying that the account was still in dispute, that they should not have sold the debt to AK whilst in dispute and that even with these supplied terms the account is still in dispute because of the missing ‘cooling off period’?

 

Should I mention why i’m disputing it in detail (cooling off period) or just give the generic ‘does not include all the prescribed terms’?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Egg have a wonderful habit of actually typing your name in the original terms and conditions which pretty much c@cks up any attempt to replace the T&C with a different set.

 

at the top of page 1 of the terms and conditions there is a blacked out area where "your name" should appear, have you blacked this out or was it blacked out when you got it?

 

Is the amount as claimed by AK the same that was outstanding with Egg?

Are their any charges or PPI on the account?

 

When Egg "sold" or otherwise passed this debt on to AK, they would have been required to notify you of the assignment under the Law of property (LOP), if they did not do so then it may be an idea to refute their claims of ownership and request (nicely) that they prove ownership of said debt.

 

It may also be worth sending Egg a Subject Access request to see what they produce

Hope this helps

 

 

If you feel that this site has helped you in any way please leave a donation if you can afford to do so.

 

If you feel that have been helpful please feel free to tip the scales.

 

 

The large print giveth, but the small print taketh away. ~Tom Waits, Small Change

 

 

Please note: i am not a qualified lawyer, any advice is offered in good faith and is based on my own and others experiences and a penchant for research and a desire to help others to empower themselves

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Egg have a wonderful habit of actually typing your name in the original terms and conditions which pretty much c*cks up any attempt to replace the T&C with a different set.

 

at the top of page 1 of the terms and conditions there is a blacked out area where "your name" should appear, have you blacked this out or was it blacked out when you got it?

they blacked it out, however I thought this part didn't have to be the original

see: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?162851#post1747504

However, the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 define what may be sent in response to a request under ss77-79. they have to send a 'true' copy but this is far short of an exact copy. They may just send a copy of current terms and conditions

 

Is the amount as claimed by AK the same that was outstanding with Egg?

Are their any charges or PPI on the account?

it is pretty much, AK have added some interest since 'aquiring' the account. there was no PPI taken out - I always saw it as a rip off and never did

 

When Egg "sold" or otherwise passed this debt on to AK, they would have been required to notify you of the assignment under the Law of property (LOP), if they did not do so then it may be an idea to refute their claims of ownership and request (nicely) that they prove ownership of said debt.

No, nothing from Egg

 

It may also be worth sending Egg a Subject Access request to see what they produce

i think I will - presumably they will still deal with me even thou the account was 'sold' ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Original Creditor has an obligation to send you all the information they hold on you.

Every journey begins with a single step :):)

 

Please note: I have no qualifications in this area - my advice is learned from the wonderful members of this Forum. Thanks to you all for your help.

 

If you have found my post helpful please leave a short message by clicking the star to the left of my profile - Thank You

 

The only person entitled to your Personal Finance details is a Judge not a DCA

 

Move all banking activity to another banking group if you have a dispute - your funds can be used to offset debts within the same group.

Be careful with Banking details (card/account numbers) as these can be used to take unauthorised payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I have noticed with Egg is that there doesn't seem to be any pattern of DCAs used. I have had both CrapQuest and Fredpricksons collecting on my Egg loan. At least AK have sent you info. Mind you, the account was asigned not sold on in my case.

Advice and comments posted by The Debt Star reflect only my personal opinion and it is up to you alone to decide what action you should take. You should always seek independent legal advice from your own qualified legal advisor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I note that the personalised T&Cs do not have the same black line down the document, which both versions of the agreement have. So these were not copied or microfiched at the same time, which suggests they have recreated them. How convenient.

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I note that the personalised T&Cs do not have the same black line down the document, which both versions of the agreement have. So these were not copied or microfiched at the same time, which suggests they have recreated them. How convenient.

 

The redeaction of the terms and conditions proves that these were not the terms and conditions issued with the agreement, whilst this in itself doesn't prove that they are invalid, it does open up the question, if the documents are legitimate, why have they had to recreate the T&C?

 

If AK have added interest to the account, is there any clause in the terms and conditions which allows a thrid party to do this?

 

You should also be following up by demanding proof of assignment from AK

Hope this helps

 

 

If you feel that this site has helped you in any way please leave a donation if you can afford to do so.

 

If you feel that have been helpful please feel free to tip the scales.

 

 

The large print giveth, but the small print taketh away. ~Tom Waits, Small Change

 

 

Please note: i am not a qualified lawyer, any advice is offered in good faith and is based on my own and others experiences and a penchant for research and a desire to help others to empower themselves

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this T&C didn't have to be the original

see: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?162851#post1747504

 

However, the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 define what may be sent in response to a request under ss77-79. they have to send a 'true' copy but this is far short of an exact copy. They may just send a copy of current terms & conditions
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, what should my next step be?

 

 

  • Write to AK stating that Egg never told me they refused my claim,
  • that they did not try to contact me to recover any more of the debt – further implying that the account was still in dispute,
  • that they should not have sold the debt to AK whilst in dispute
  • request proof of assignment from AK
  • that even with these supplied terms the account is still in dispute because of the missing ‘cooling off period’?
    Should I mention why i’m disputing it in detail (cooling off period) or just give the generic ‘does not include all the prescribed terms’?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought this T&C didn't have to be the original

see: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?162851#post1747504

 

But it must be the T&C which were presented at the time of signing.

“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But it must be the T&C which were presented at the time of signing.

 

and as the ones issued to you have been redacted, it creates a doubt that they are the same ones, why would they redact "your" name? they would surely only redact if it wasn't your name at all and if it isn't your name, then they cannot be the correct T&C as they belonged to someone else

Hope this helps

 

 

If you feel that this site has helped you in any way please leave a donation if you can afford to do so.

 

If you feel that have been helpful please feel free to tip the scales.

 

 

The large print giveth, but the small print taketh away. ~Tom Waits, Small Change

 

 

Please note: i am not a qualified lawyer, any advice is offered in good faith and is based on my own and others experiences and a penchant for research and a desire to help others to empower themselves

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
But it must be the T&C which were presented at the time of signing.

 

do you have a reference to this? i can't find it anywhere

sorry but my legal reading head isn't great - sure all this cr*p is intended to baffle us!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The T&C's don't need to be ones which carry your name. But they must be the ones that you were given at the time of your application. These can be generic T&C's that applied to all applications they received at the time. If they ever took you to court, they would have to evidence that these were the T&C's that you were given.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
do you have a reference to this? i can't find it anywhere

sorry but my legal reading head isn't great - sure all this cr*p is intended to baffle us!!

 

When Egg create an agreement they produce a set of Terms and Conditions which have "your name" printed on them, this is not a statute, nor is it laid out in law, it is just something that Egg do.

 

Because the T&C supplied to you do not have your name on them and have actually had the (different?) name redacted, it could be assumed that these were not the correct T&C applied at the time of the agreement being taken out, the DCA would have to prove that they were the same T&C.

 

They could do this without producing "the" named T&C and as stated they could produce a generic set of T&C, however the doubt would still exist because Egg always produce "named" T&C to link them directly to the agreement, it doesn't in itself make the agreement unenforceable, it merely adds a doubt.

Hope this helps

 

 

If you feel that this site has helped you in any way please leave a donation if you can afford to do so.

 

If you feel that have been helpful please feel free to tip the scales.

 

 

The large print giveth, but the small print taketh away. ~Tom Waits, Small Change

 

 

Please note: i am not a qualified lawyer, any advice is offered in good faith and is based on my own and others experiences and a penchant for research and a desire to help others to empower themselves

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...