Moorcroft/RBS

[Pokerkaiser]

I recently sent a CCA request to Moorcroft and had the following response:

 

We refer to previous correspondence and confirm that at this time our client is currently unable to provide a signed copy of the agreement relating to this account.

 

Please be aware however that Courts have recently held that the inability of a creditor to produce a copy of an agreement does not mean that the debt does not exist and will be written off. In the case of McGuffick v RBS PLC (2009) EWHC 2386 Mr Justice Flaux ruled: "Although the Consumer Credit Act may render the agreement unenforceable, the agreement remains a valid and subsisting contract and rights and obligations under it continue to exist".

 

Our client confirms that they there remains an obligation to honour the original agreement and that information will continue to be supplied to the Credit reference Agencies.

The purpose of reporting information to a CRA os to promote sensible and informed decision making with regard to financial lending and the Courts have held that the demanding of payment, issuing of default notices and instructing a third party to demand or seek payment does not amount to enforcement. Our client's position therefore remains that the balance of your account remains due and payable and your credit file will continue to reflect that this account is in default and will only be marked as satisfied once repayment has occurred.

 

We can confirm that we have placed your account on hold for 14 days and request that you make contact with our call centre on the above tel no. We would be happy to discuss the position with you and can confirm on a without prejudice basis that it would be our aim to reach a possible discounted agreement based upon your financial circumstances and to discuss a repayment proposal that you can afford to maintain.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Please could someone advise me on my next course of action with this?

 

Many Thanks

[Deb T]

First off, do NOT call them on the phone.

 

Secondly, send the dispute letter in

 

Thirdly, do nothing more, they cannot enforce the debt without the agreement and in it's absence they can ask you to pay, request you to pay but that doesn't mean you

have to and if the account is placed in dispute they shouldn't be asking you for any money at all.

 

Dispute template below, remember to edit accordingly and sign simply with a squiggle and NOT your usual signature and send recorded delivery.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?436-Failiure-to-provide-a-copy-of-the-agreement-within-the-prescribed-timescale.

[mj4j2000]

sorry.i recive same letter from morecrap. As dev advised i sent dispute letter.

[Tingy]

Sorry, I may be wrong, but my understanding was that they can still pursue it, but cannot take it through the courts. This does seem a slightly stupid position as if you can't get taken to court, who is going to pay out of goodwill? I'm not preaching debt avoidance, but......

[Deb T]

er...yes, hence they cannot 'enforce it' (see my original post) they can ask for it (see original post) but no agreement means no enforcement (usually)

[Pokerkaiser]

Thanks for your posts. I've also received my £1 postal order back!! What should I do with this?

[Tingy]

If you can cash it! After that just leave them do as they wish. In reality as we've said they can do nothing until they come up with the agreement. In the meantime everything is on freeze.

[Pokerkaiser]

Well I've sent the dispute letter. Will update once I get a response from muppetcroft

[Pokerkaiser]

I've received a letter today from muppetcroft stating that failure to contact them by 20/12 may result in the issue of legal proceedings. Obviously they have no intentions of actioning the cca request and have ignored the dispute letter. Should I do anything more now? Or should I let them keep sending me junk mail?

[Tingy]

I would suggest you have a couple of options. Just to be absolutely sure you sent a valid CCA request, allowed 12+2 working days for them to respond then placed the account in dispute as they had failed to respond.

 

As long as the above is true you can either file them as they shouldn't be sending them (store as evidence); you could write pointing out that legally the account is in dispute and while you are prepared to accept this one letter as an oversight, any further collection activity will be deemed harrassment until the CCA request is complied with. Finally you could sned a harrassment letter now as they are breaking the law pursuing you while it is legally being disputed.

[Pokerkaiser]

I did the cca request and definitely gave them the timescale before sending the dispute letter. Could you provide me the link for the harrassment letter please

[Tingy]

Amend to suit:

 

Your address

 

 

Address of the loan company

Or

Debt Collection Agency

Date (insert today’s date)

 

By recorded delivery

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Reference or Account No: (Insert their reference or account number; this will be on the letter they have sent you)

 

I am / We are writing to you to express my / our annoyance at the way and frequency that you are contacting me / us by telephone/ letter. Your continued action is causing me and my family unjustifiable stress and worry. I /we feel I am / we are being subjected to unnecessary physical and psychological harassment.

Under the Debt Collection Guidance issued by the Office of Fair Trading Guidelines (updated 2006) I / we have detailed the following sections which I /we feel you are in breach of;

UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES

Communication

It is unfair to communicate, in whatever form, with consumers in an unclear, inaccurate or misleading manner.

2.2 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. use of official looking documents intended or likely to mislead debtors as to their status, for example, documents made to resemble court claims.

b. leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors' lack of knowledge

c. those contacting debtors not making clear who they are, who they work for, what their role is, what the purpose of the contact is

d. unnecessary and unhelpful use of legal and technical language, for example, use of Latin phrases

e. failing to provide debtors or creditors with information on status of debts, for example, not providing requested balance statements when reasonably requested

f. contacting debtors at unreasonable times

g. ignoring or disregarding debtors' legitimate wishes in respect of when and where to contact them, for example, shift workers who ask not to be telephoned during certain times of the day

h. asking or instructing debtors to make contact on premium rate telephone numbers

False representation of authority and/or legal position

2.3 Those contacting debtors must not be deceitful by misrepresenting their authority

and/or the correct legal position.

2.4 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. falsely implying or claiming authority, for example, claiming to work on instructions from the courts, claiming to be bailiffs or, in Scotland, sheriff officers or messenger-at-arms

b. falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when it legally cannot, for example, referring to bankruptcy or sequestration proceedings when the balance is too low to qualify for such proceedings or claiming a right of entry when no court order to this effect has been granted

c. misrepresenting status or backing, such as

• using a logo which falsely implies government backing

• using a business name which implies public body status, or

• falsely claiming trade body membership

d. falsely implying or stating that action has been taken when it has not, for example, that civil action has been taken or that a court judgment has already been obtained

e. falsely implying or stating that failure to pay a debt is a criminal offence or that criminal proceedings will be brought

f. pursuing third parties for payment when they are not liable

g. taking or threatening to take court action in the wrong jurisdiction, for example, taking action against a Scottish debtor in an English court unless legally justified.

Physical/psychological harassment

2.5 Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive.

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. contacting debtors at unreasonable times and at unreasonable intervals (MOST COMMON ONE)

b. pressurising debtors to sell property, to raise funds by further borrowing or to extend their borrowing

c. using more than one debt collection business at the same time resulting in repetitive and/or frequent contact by different parties

d. not ensuring that an adequate history of the debt is passed on as appropriate resulting in repetitive and/or frequent contact by different parties

e. not informing the debtor when their case has been passed on to a different debt collector

f. pressurising debtors to pay in full, in unreasonably large instalments, or to increase payments when they are unable to do so (MOST COMMON ONE)

g. making threatening statements or gestures or taking actions which suggest harm to debtors

h. ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

i. disclosing or threatening to disclose debt details to third parties unless legally entitled to do so

j. acting in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor either deliberately or through lack of care, for example, by not putting correspondence in a sealed envelope and putting it through a letterbox, thereby running the risk that it could be read by third parties.

Deceptive and/or unfair methods

2.7 Dealings with debtors are not to be deceitful and/or unfair.

2.8 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. sending demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question, for example, threatening debt recovery action to 'the occupier' or sending a payment demand to all people sharing the same name/date of birth as a debtor in the hope that contact with the correct debtor will be made.

b. disclosing debt details to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question, for example, disclosing details to 'the occupier' of an address.

c. refusing to deal with appointed or authorised third parties, such as Citizens Advice Bureaux, independent advice centres or money advisers

d. contacting debtors directly and bypassing their appointed representatives

e. operating a policy, without reason, of refusing to negotiate with debt management companies (COMMON ONE)

f. passing on debtor details to debt management companies without the debtors' informed prior consent

g. failing to refer on to the creditor reasonable offers to pay by instalments (COMMON ONE)

h. not passing on payments received within a reasonable time resulting in delays that adversely affect a debtor's financial position

i. failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued

j. requiring an individual to supply information to prove they are not the debtor in question, for example, driving licences, passports, full name, date of birth, signatures

k. not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt.

 

I am / We are also familiar with the following legislation that can help harassed consumers;

 

 

• Section 40 - Administration of Justice Act 1970.
  

 

 

• The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.
  

 

 

• Section 4A - Public Order Act 1986.
  

 

 

• Section 1 & 2 - Malicious Communications Act 1988.
  

 

I am / We are also familiar with the Credit Services Association and, to that end, require details of your regulating body, which will be separate to the OFT.

 

Any further breaches of the Debt Collection Guidelines will be reported forthwith to Trading Standards, the Office of Fair Trading and your representative body.

 

I / We now await written confirmation that you will in future act in a more professional manner and only make contact by letter.

 

Yours faithfully,

[Pokerkaiser]

I decided to give the benefit of the doubt and just file the letter however I've just received another letter advising that they intend to visit my home. I'm not worried about this as I know they won't do this but what I am worried about is the fact that the account is in dispute and yet they continue to pursue the debt. I know I can now send the harassment letter but what if they decide to ignore this also?

[Tingy]

You;ll find they will disregard the in dispute letter. Quite a few even sell it when in dispute. This isn't legal either as far as I know. The way I see it if they haven't complied with your CCA request you have every right to place it in dispute. They know what this means, a do you. Now think of what a judge would make of it should it end up in court and you've got all this evidence. They're playing nicely into your hands.

 

See what others say, but that's how I see it.

[PriorityOne]

I've received a letter today from muppetcroft stating that failure to contact them by 20/12 may result in the issue of legal proceedings. Obviously they have no intentions of actioning the cca request and have ignored the dispute letter. Should I do anything more now? Or should I let them keep sending me junk mail?

 

Isn't this when the world's meant to end?....

 

Sorry..... couldn't resist.....

[Melita]

hello Tingy,

I hope you dont mind me jumping on to this thread, but i still have difficulty in navigating this site sometimes!

My 20yr old daughter has a problem with moorcroft too!

they started ringing my house in the last couple of months wanting to speak to my daughter- they have my house number and address, I have explained this is no longer her address (she left 2 years ago) I did not say she was my daughter, nor did i give any contact details they requested for her.

Having spoken to my daughter(who is unemployed and just had a baby) she denies any debt with them -she states she received a letter from them (came to my address) stating she had a debt of £350 to the RBS -she has no account with them, i do know that halifax is under RBS and she does have an account with them which is inactive - in other words she has nothing going in or out - the only possible money she could owe would be the £5 a month they charge but even that would only amount to £55, but that would be into her overdraft, so that is not what it is. She has given me full account of all banks shes with and has no credit cards or loads so we're confused as to where this has come from.

They tried ringing this morning around 10 am, when i put the phone down on them without saying a word, they within the hour, obtained my daughters mobile number and rang her twice! she then accused me of giving her mobile which i would never do.

but anyway, the first call she got they asked if she was (and qoated her full name) my daughter said yes - thinking it was maybe the health visitor or something- they then identified themselves as 'steven from moorcroft' and she hung up (i had previously told her to do this if they ever rang the house number) they tried again and she just rejected the call.

Now - i have had experience of what to do with this in the past and know not to speak to them on the phone and ask for everything to be put in wrting and send responses with recorded delivery, report them for harassment on the phone etc etc. but my problem is i dont want them to have her address nor do i want them to write to my address anymore! as i dont want my address black listed again as ive just managed to get credit for something!

so how should my daughter proceed baring mind the above!

Thanking you in adance for your time

Melita:wink:

[Halibutt]

They're gits (allegedly) aren't they Melita?

 

If it was me, I'd send a one-off letter to Moorcrap stating that the phone calls they are making to you amount to harassment and re-state that the person they are seeking has not lived at your address for over two years. If they persist in their harassment, you'll report them to all the relevant regulatory bodies AND the local police. The police threat has stopped many a DCA phoning me. They don't like it up 'em you see?

 

As for your daughter, she could simply send them either the 'Bemused' or 'Prove It' letter templates. It could simply be that Moorcrap are on another phishing exercise and are after someone with the same name as your daughter - mistaken identity.

 

Good luck!

 

H. x

[Melita]

Hi Halibutt! like the name !

yes could send them letter but doing so would identify me as her mother, unless i just use initials? do i just click on the 'phonecalls' icon thingy to get to he letters?

my daughters name is long -two given names and double barrelled sirname and they quote all of it so its doubtful its mistaken identity - more like her name was sold to them or whatever these vultures do.

I also read online not -on here- something very interesting - they have obtained names and addresses of young ppl some of whom are a studying and/or abroad and they phone their parents saying thier kids owe a few hundred when its not true they sound legit and the worried and harrassed parents pay up rather than see thier precious kids blacklisted and in debt!!!

so i smell a rat cos my daughter is only 20 - i have never let them know shes my daughter tho so they have not tried to theaten me in any way.

if she sends a letter - it means that they would have her address - and i dont think that is wise(?)

could we not have a P.O. box like these barstewards normally do ?

Melita x

[Tingy]

Certainly from your point of view you just need to send a firmly worded letter along the lines mentioned above stating the addressee no longer lives at this address. Just sign yourself as The Occupier - they can find your name easily enough from looking at the Electoral Role anyway.

 

As for your daughter, if she is positive she does not owe this money, she has nothing to fear by sending a Prove It letter and giving her address. The Prove It letter is this:

 

Prove it letter:

 

Name/Address:

 

Date:

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

 

I/we would point out that I/we have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to (insert company name).

 

I am/we are familiar with the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR 2008) and the Office of Fair Trading's Guidance on debt collection, which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

 

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. AND in not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment. I would also remind you, that I/we are aware of the 'MALG' Guidance/Code that you should comply with.

 

I/we would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my/our liability for the debt in question.

 

I/we await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed.

Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to Trading Standards and also inform the Office Of Fair Trading of your actions.

 

I/we look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

[Melita]

Thanks for the template Tingy ! thats a huge help/time saver xxxx

 

So the buggers probably know i'm her mother then?!?! we have the same sirname! proving to me that they are trying it on - see my previous post re, phoning/harrassing parents.

I will make sure that my daughter goes through all her paperwork to make sure there is no truth to thier claim - but as she says- shes had no previous letters from RBS etc - shes just had the one from 'morecrafty'() last year and i always pass on any letters that still come here for her.

All this does get on my nerves - I've spent all last year fighting my bank for unfair bank charges - I won in the end. Then more or less at the same time we had a DCA on my husbands back over a debt sold to them illegally, which my husband was actually paying prior to being sold to the DCA! never paid the DCA a penny - won that one too:razz:

dont want another one! especially as hubby being made redundant at end of Feb so we might get into hot water again!

It never ends ARGH!!!

Melita x

[Tingy]

Been living like that for years now. You do eventually learn not to be stressed by them!

[Happyhippy1959]

how many years Tingy did it take for you to live with it. Took me about 2?????

[Tingy]

Slightly longer because of getting rid of bailiffs then facing realistic bankruptcy while suffering with a long term illness, but certainly no more than 2 1/2 - 3 years, and while those times are unpleassant, when you come out the other side you life is transformed as you can actually live again.

[diddydicky]

Sorry, I may be wrong, but my understanding was that they can still pursue it, but cannot take it through the courts. This does seem a slightly stupid position as if you can't get taken to court, who is going to pay out of goodwill? I'm not preaching debt avoidance, but......

 

 

 

 

alas, thanks to a totally balmpot decision in the high court the creditor can indeed "take it through the courts" but what they cannot do is ask the judge to enforce the debt

7

 

the way to deal with any court claim is to apply for the case to be stayed until such time as the claimant complies with the legislation under s77/79

[Tingy]

alas, thanks to a totally balmpot decision in the high court the creditor can indeed "take it through the courts" but what they cannot do is ask the judge to enforce the debt

7

 

the way to deal with any court claim is to apply for the case to be stayed until such time as the claimant complies with the legislation under s77/79

 

So what would be the point of them taking it to court?