Capquest request signature on CCA cap1 card

[pidg2003]

I have found this letter on another thread.

 

Dear Sir,

 

I wrote to you in early December 2010 with a CCA request, enclosing the statutory payment as required. I note the letter was signed for by yourselves the following day. As I am sure you are aware under The Consumer Credit Act 1974 Section 78 (1) states:

 

78 Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement.

 

(1)The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of £1, shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

 

(a)the state of the account, and

 

(b)the amount, if any currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and

 

©the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.

 

The same section, subsection 6 states:

 

(6)If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

 

(a)he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;

 

To date I have received no reply whatsoever to my CCA request, and so I challenge the validity of your entitlement to place the account into default, as you did on 10 January 2011, as until such time as a copy of my agreement is received you are not lawfully entitled to take any further enforcement action on this account whatsoever.

 

I would like you also to take note therefore that this letter serves as an additional formal request under the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR), 2008 for written confirmation as to whether MBNA currently hold or have ever held a properly executed Consumer Credit Agreement in their possession pertaining to myself and if not, to kindly confirm so in writing.

 

If you do hold such an agreement it should be sent to me, along with the other relevant documents mentioned, in response to this letter in order to comply with my original request made in early December.

 

In your Default Notice served under Section 87(1) of the CCA 1974 dated 10 January 2011 you state I have to pay all the arrears by 31.1.11 to remedy this breach. Bearing in mind the situation as it currently stands and outlined in detail above, I would respectfully suggest that this comment already places you in clear breach of CPUTR 2008 Part Two Regulation 5(1) and 5(2), even if the default notice had been lawfully served. I trust therefore that no further action will be taken until such time as the issues raised in this letter are resolved.

 

I look forward to your reply within 14 days of the date of this letter.

 

Yours faithfully.

 

Should I send an amended version of this??

[Bazooka Boo]

What is the total amount they are asking you to pay to remedy the breach of agreement?

[pidg2003]

£131.11

[Bazooka Boo]

Is that the arrears?

[pidg2003]

Yes i stopped making the payments as you suggested. I have still received no CCA from them.

[Bazooka Boo]

OK did you send them the 'failed' letter?

[pidg2003]

Yes sent them that and an account in dispute letter. All returned saying as there was no signature they could not reply.

[pidg2003]

Is the letter I posted at 11:36 today the next step??

[Bazooka Boo]

No, you have sent them the dispute and failed letter, let them rot now, pointless entertaining them in letter tennis, give a dog a bone and it will come back.

 

Make complaints about them to the OFT&TS

Local MP, BBC Watchdog, CSA...next doors cat etc etc etc

[pidg2003]

Thanks for your help I will let them be. Will get the complaints letters off tomorrow.

[olliepup]

Hi all,

 

After sending the no sig letter and leaving them with it they eventually decided to do a CCA request without my sig and they produced a application form, i wrote back informing of this and haven't heard anything since.

 

Wait and see what comes next.

 

Cheers.

[pidg2003]

Interesting development. Today I received a reply to my complaint to the FOS re FDs insistence on a signature..

 

It goes as follows (ignoring the inane drivel)

 

Having reviewed matters, I consider that the business has not acted unreasonably by asking that your written request be confirmed with your signature. Signatures are required to prevent third parties from writing to the business with instructions that could potentially be detrimental to the relevant account holder.

 

I therefore consider this matter relates to the business' exercise of its own discretion and this Service does not normally become involved in disputes concerning a business' commercial judgement, and i have seen nothing to do so on this occasion.

 

I note that you have raised an issue with regard to you having 'tested' the business' procedures by writing with a deliberately altered signature to see what would happen. I would like to take this opportunity to explain that under the terms and conditions of the account, the business would or would not be in a position to provide information without your signature, depending on the nature of the information being sent.

 

Because of this, I have to tell you that I am unable to recommend that your complaint should be upheld. I appreciate that this is likely to come as a disappointment to you. I know that this is not the outcome you were hoping for, but i hope that my explanation has been helpful in setting out clearly why I have taken this view.

 

However if you disagree with how I have reached my conclusions, please write to me by 1 March 2011 - setting out your reasons and including any evidence you have not already provided and that you think is important to your case.

[pidg2003]

So according to the FOS you have to supply a signature??

 

Isn't this going against the Consumer Credit Act itself or whatever rules are in place??

[Bazooka Boo]

All they are saying is that in their opinion the DCA or whoever can ask for you to sign correspondence to them, however, without knowing the exact wording of your complaint to them, it would be hard to see where they are coming from.

 

If you sent a complaint along the lines of, "They have previously corresponded with me on numerous occasions and only now are they unsure as to my identity and wish me to confirm it by way of a signature" then I would write back to them again and say that you do not believe they are correct in their summation and direct them to the ICO's finding and statement on signatures.

 

However, their findings are not surprising really, considering this is their industry.....

It matters not, you have made the complaint and added another to the growing pile regarding the way in which their corrupt industry is run.

 

You have disputed the account, if they choose to ignore your legal request for information and refuse to acknowledge that their failure to provide it due to their pettiness then there is nothing left to do, except complain to the CRA's and the OFT&TS.

[Seminole]

As BB says, if you haven't already pointed out to the FOS that FD have sent correspondence to you address, they have clearly satisfied themselves as to your identity. I would go so far as to say that you are concerned that FD could use your signature to contruct a credit agreement where none exists at the moment. Be careful not to accuse anyone of actually doing this.

 

If you haven't already done so you should make a similar complaint to Trading Standards.

[pidg2003]

Thanks for your replies.

 

Yes I did mention the fact that they were sending statements etc to my address.

 

I'm thinking of writing back and saying that nowhere in the Consumer Credit Act does it say that a signature is required for a CCA request so aren't the FOS going against the law which governs these agreements.

 

BB what was the Information Commissioners finding and statement on signatures??

[Bazooka Boo]

http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/checklist_for_handling_requests_for_personal_information.pdf

 

And that statement is for Subject Access Requests, which contains much more confidential information than a poxy CCA request.

[pidg2003]

Thanks very much for all your help BB it is much appreciated:thumb:

[Bazooka Boo]

No worries, keep us all updated, the signature ruse is one of their puerile attempts at dragging out the whole process of complying with the alleged debtors lawful requests, once they use this extremely inept stalling tactic, you know they are panicking!

[pidg2003]

Received a reply from the FO this morning regarding my appealing their decision. I had used the ICO information and the fact I was worried about there being the chance of a reconstituted agreement where none exists. Also remember I wrote to them (the OC) with a letter containing a different signature and they had replied.

 

Now it appears the adjudicator that made the original decision, reviewed it herself and decided she was right. You couldn't make it up. She writes.

 

"I should like to take this opportunity to explain that the FOS operates outside of the law and we consider complaints based on what is 'fair and reasonable'. Although we do pay due regard to legal principles, we are an alternative forum to the courts and do not make our decisions based on legal principles alone.

 

While I appreciate you consider that there is no legal requirement for a consumer to provide a signature for a CCA request - this does not mean that the business is acting unreasonably by requesting you to provide one.

 

As previously explained, this matter relates to the business' exercise of its commercial judgement which is outside our remit. The FOS does not have the requisite jurisdiction to request that the business alter its standard practice in this regard.

 

You have indicated that you are not willing to provide a signature because it could be used to construct a credit agreement where none exists; however, I do not consider this is likely under the circumstances as the business is simply asking that your written request be signed by yourself in the normal letter writing convention. I believe that the business is acting in the best interests of its consumers by ensuring that no confidential information is sent out to anyone that it cannot formally identify.

 

 

Because of this I have to tell you that I am unable to recommend that your complaint should be upheld."

 

I have till March 9th to appeal to an actual ombudsman.

 

The points I take out are as follows;

 

1) If it outside their remit then fair enough just say that but they should not be making a judgement in anyones favour. Just say it is outside our remit and they can't help me.

2) I have already proven that the need for a signature for security reasons is nonsense as I signed a letter altering my signature and they replied. So basically I could get a chimp to sign my CCA request and according to the FOS and FD that's fine.

3) If they are unsure of my identity and need a signature to prove my identity why are they still sending me letters and statements to my address without the need for a signature. The same address I want the CCA sent to??

4) They are ignoring the ICOs guidelines.

5) Surely someone else should have reviewed this adjudicators decision not her reviewing her own.

 

My instinct is to take it to appeal with an Ombudsman. Your thoughts please??

[Seminole]

Absolutely. You have nothing to lose by taking it to the next stage.

[pidg2003]

Ok appealed to Ombudsman.

 

Received an e mail from First Direct the other day asking me to call them. Not likely I thought so I replied to e mail basically setting out my CCA request etc and that I will only deal with them in writing. Received a reply back saying they could not answer me as my e mail had not been received through official sources. Did make me laugh and next time they e mail me that will be my response.

 

Received another Final Demand from FD this morning this time for full amount. Usual stuff, going to ignore.

[Bazooka Boo]

That is indicative of the sheer stupidity and incompetence of FD attempting to drag their scrawny heels even further by some lame comment about 'official sources' whatever next?

 

I wonder if they know that emails are a legally accepted form of correspondence?

[pidg2003]

Right today have received letter from DCA requesting full payment.

 

Can anyone point me in the direction of a current and up to date reply letter that tells them "Oi chaps you still haven't provided a CCA so please refer this back to the OC"

[Bazooka Boo]

Did you tell them when they had ran out of time to supply you with your CCA first time round? IE, tell them that they had failed to supply the CCA therefore the account was disputed?

 

If not this is the letter you should send http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?436-Failure-to-provide-a-copy-of-the-agreement-within-the-prescribed-timescale.

 

If you have already sent that, then there is nothing you can do except ignore them, their computer is obviously back to it's normal cycle of trash.