Electronic Signature for Online Applications

[Jonny_J]

Wow

 

Cool! I haven't heard anything form them in ages

[RoyalIrish]

LOL!

 

I'm getting telephone calls now mate!

 

08.20 this morning!

 

What a load of sewer rats they are!

 

Have you decided what you are going to do regarding this yet?

 

RI

[Jonny_J]

Yeah I was thinking that I might let them stew for a little bit, and see what happens.

 

Have you told them that the debt is settled? Surely they can't chase a debt that they have indicated is settled.

[RoyalIrish]

Yeah, 'stewing' was my plan also!

 

I'm sure the CRA will side with the DCA, wouldn't waste my time but if it ever goes to court I can produce it!

 

As far as I'm concerned they are going to have to chase me REAL hard on this one!

 

RI

[Jonny_J]

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Thank you for the 'Credit Agreement' that you sent me from Vanquis with regard to the above account. Whilst S78 of the Consumer Credit Act does indeed allow reconstructed agreements, and that there is no requirement for a signature on the reconstruction, it's purpose is not to validate a debt. It is for information purposes only.

The 'reconstruction' that you have supplied me is flawed in many respects. Firstly, this is not so much a reconstruction, but a fabrication. Cary v HSBC states that lenders can reconstruct the information from any source, but it must be accurate and honest. In this case there are a number of inaccuracies in the 'spreadsheet' that you have obtained from Vanquis. These are details that I would not have filled in incorrectly. Secondly, although there is no need for a signature on document such as this, there is a need to prove that I would have accepted the terms and conditions that you have supplied. This document provides no such proof. Indeed, I could find enough information on the internet about any one to construct such a document if I were of a mind to. Thirdly, there is no information on the state of the account, such as statements etc. Because of the points raised above this account is now in dispute. I am granting to you a further 21 days to produce a copy of an executable agreement. After that I will consider that the above account is closed and that you will no longer pursue the alleged debt.

I would also reiterate that I will only deal with this matter in writing.

Furthermore, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make such an appointment with you.

There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v Sheppard & Short Ltd [1959] 2 QB 384. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and, if you do so, you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance.

[RoyalIrish]

Very good Jonny!

 

I would throw some questions in as well.

 

1. Where did this document originate?

 

2. Where did the personal information that is entered in this document originate?

 

3. Is this document a computer screenshot or a spreadsheet recontructed from data held elsewhere?

 

4. Were my personal details inserted in this document purely for the purposes of 'fulfilling my CCA request' or does this document exist in this format elsewhere?

 

etc. etc.

 

You know the type of things to ask!

 

We need to make them justify this, in writing so that when and if it goes to court they will have to explain how this nonsense proves liability for debt!

 

To date, they have NOTHING that says I even HAD a Vanquis card!

 

I have also recently realised that Lowell's shouldn't be chasing me on this one because I had this placed in dispute with Connaught after they defaulted on a CCA request.

 

So, Lowell's should not have bought this one as it was in default!

 

But then, we are talking about Lowell's the Losers from Leeds!

 

Since when have they been honest and proper in their proceedings and dealings with people?

 

I am getting letters from Red, Lowell's and Hamptons now, nice!

 

I have NEVER had any default notices, statements or notices of assignment from any DCA on this.

 

Lowell's seem pretty content to pursue me for this even though there is no actual evidence that I even had a Vanquis account, which is strange!

 

But then, we are talking about Lowell's the Losers from Leeds!

 

I'll have a go at revamping your brilliant letter to include some facts and observations.

 

Always with the questions, questions and more questions.

 

They need to justify their actions with this one!

 

RI

[RoyalIrish]

Latest drivel from RED!

 

I'm quite pleased about this as the offering of attractive discounts means that they aren't confident about their 'online application' attempt.

 

[Jonny_J]

Lol. I thought that they'd already instructed Hampton's Legal. Hmmmm I wonder who's turn it'll be tomorrow to write to you.

 

I've sent my letter anyway. I'll see what nonsense comes back. I might start charging an administration fee for sending letters, as this is a genuine complaint that they're refusing to deal with.

[RoyalIrish]

It's pathetic

 

They are so incompetent that they lose track of what letters they print from their Threat-O-Matic 5000 printer to send.

 

Keep 'em coming boys, the Hamster has never had it so good!

 

RI

 

(Waves to Lowell's Threat Monkeys)

[Jonny_J]

I feel that what they're doing is against the OFT guidelines, which says that it is unfair for more than one DCA to chase a debt at the same time.

 

If they would argue that this is not more than one DCA, then they are misrepresenting their company.

 

I do feel that there are grounds for a complaint here. Mine went from Lowells, to Red, and then back to Lowells when I ignored them.

 

If we really are supposed to believe that these are different companies, where is the appropriate paper work such as assignment notices?

[Jonny_J]

Lowells have been bought up!

 

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/news/news-item.cfm?news=2314

[RoyalIrish]

I got all 3 of them sending me threatograms now, doesn't bother me because I just bin 'em!

 

I'm half hoping that they send me a Statutory Demand 'cos it would save me a fortune doing it myself!

[Crespo21]

I have received the exact same Vanquis credit agreement after requesting a CCF from Lowell's. Has anyone got a template letter to send in retaliation to this load of junk. I am also in dispute with them over a Hutchinson 3g account that they so far have provided no credit agreement for. What sort of time frame should i leave it for before requesting that the default be removed.?? At the moment it is at about 12 + 22 days.

 

 

Oh and Hello fellow credit repairers.

[the_shadow]

I have received the exact same Vanquis credit agreement after requesting a CCF from Lowell's. Has anyone got a template letter to send in retaliation to this load of junk. I am also in dispute with them over a Hutchinson 3g account that they so far have provided no credit agreement for. What sort of time frame should i leave it for before requesting that the default be removed.?? At the moment it is at about 12 + 22 days.

 

 

Oh and Hello fellow credit repairers.

 

Mobile phones or mobile data contracts are not covered by the CCA. There is no requirement for them to show any sort of agreement, monthly statements showing your calls would be enough to prove the debt in court

 

S.

[Crespo21]

Mobile phones or mobile data contracts are not covered by the CCA. There is no requirement for them to show any sort of agreement, monthly statements showing your calls would be enough to prove the debt in court

 

 

 

S.

 

 

 

 

it was for a laptop and dongle. it was never used due to not being able to get a 3g signal at my home despite being told otherwise. there were no monthly payments made as I didn't want the thing the moment it arrived. I attempted to give it back but was told I was in a 24 month contract and there was nothing I could do.

so thought to hell with them and never gave them a penny.

 

needless to say I was defaulted.

 

I now have a family and want to get a mortgage but I have 3 defaults I need to clear so I can move on and put my past behind me. unfortunately these debt collectors will not remove my defaults even if I pay the debts in full and just mark them as settled which is of no use to me so I am trying any method I can to have them removed so I can move on with my life.

[Jonny_J]

Crespo,

 

How long after you got the dongle did you try to give it back?

 

Do you have proof that you were told that there was nothing you could do because it was a 24 month contract?

 

And how long ago was this?

[RoyalIrish]

How did you get sent a Vanquis 'Spreadsheet' posing as a credit agreement?

 

Did you have a Vanquis credit card?

[Jonny_J]

Hello RI

 

Haven't heard anything in reply to may letter yet.

 

I shouldn't think it will be long though:-)

[RoyalIrish]

They are probably formulating a 'smartarse' answer for you mate!

 

'This is legal', 'this is legit' blah blah blah!

 

We are within our rights, etc. etc.

 

Usual ****e!

 

I really want them to take someone to court on this one to see if a judge thinks it is legitimate!

[Jonny_J]

They're more than likely trying to work out how to reply using the work processor.

 

Where does the paper go?

I don't know.

 

Well who does?

So and so used it last.

 

Where's he then?

He left.

 

Well get him on the phone, I need to know where the paper goes.

Phone????

[Jonny_J]

Why did I just se a banner ad for Vanquis at the top of the page on this site?

[Jonny_J]

"We're looking into your query"

 

A very polite letter in reply to mine.

 

Either it's going to hit the fan very soon, or they know this is no more than toilet paper!

[RoyalIrish]

Jonny,

 

Could you send me a copy of your letter mate via PM or paste it on this thread, I'm gonna send it off to them to see if we can put some pressure on them to get 'legal' on it.

 

If they are prepared to try and take this to court then we need to force them into doing just that so that a precedent could maybe be achieved.

 

They seem to be bluffing with this one and I am 99% sure that if faced with court action they will back down and scuttle back under the dung heap.

 

After all, it is absolute nonsense and anyone can see it is entirely fabricated to bypass their failure to adhere to a CCA request because NO DAMN CCA EXISTS.

 

'Sorry! we don't actually have a CCA because of the length of time the account has been opened but here is a fabricated spreadsheet with some of your details on it which proves you owe us money, pay up or else!'

 

It's absolutely ridiculous!

 

Why have CCA's in the first place if ****** companies like Lowell's can print off a spreadsheet with any crap printed on it proceed to use it as evidence of debt?

 

In short, the sooner we get this into court then the quicker Lowell's/Vanquis will be seen as fraudulently manufacturing evidence of debt.

 

RI

Edited July 1, 2011 by RoyalIrish

[Jonny_J]

Of course Mate, it is as follows:-

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Date: xxxxxxxx

 

Your Reference: xxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for the 'Credit Agreement' that you sent me from Vanquis with regard to the above account. Whilst S78 of the Consumer Credit Act does indeed allow reconstructed agreements, and that there is no requirement for a signature on the reconstruction, it's purpose is not to validate a debt. It is for information purposes only.

The 'reconstruction' that you have supplied me is flawed in many respects. Firstly, this is not so much a reconstruction, but a fabrication. Cary v HSBC states that lenders can reconstruct the information from any source, but it must be accurate and honest. In this case there are a number of inaccuracies in the 'spreadsheet' that you have obtained from Vanquis. These are details that I would not have filled in incorrectly. Secondly, although there is no need for a signature on document such as this, there is a need to prove that I would have accepted the terms and conditions that you have supplied. This document provides no such proof. Indeed, I could find enough information on the internet about any one to construct such a document if I were of a mind to. Thirdly, there is no information on the state of the account, such as statements etc. Because of the points raised above this account is now in dispute. I am granting to you a further 21 days to produce a copy of an executable agreement. After that I will consider that the above account is closed and that you will no longer pursue the alleged debt.

I would also reiterate that I will only deal with this matter in writing.

Furthermore, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make such an appointment with you.

There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v Sheppard & Short Ltd [1959] 2 QB 384. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and, if you do so, you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance.

 

Yours Sincerely

[RoyalIrish]

Cheers!