Telefonica O2 ignored my "prove it" letter. What should i do?

[h8_Halifax]

Lighthearted addendum

===================

previous to starting this thread i rarely received emails from O2, however, now i seem to be getting at least two or three every day ... and they are, at least from the one's i have glanced at, pretty good offers.

tbh, if i didn't already have more than enough mobiles for the entire family i would seriously be thinking about taking advantage of them ... well, if it hadn't been for this, er, "issue".

still, makes you wonder if they trawl the complaint files and send them sweeteners LOL.

[cdj59]

4.2 It should be noted that, while the obligation under section 78(4) to

provide periodic statements in relation to running-account credit

agreements does not apply to small agreements, no such exclusion

applies in relation to the provision of copies and statements on a request

under section 78(1).

22 Taken from the consumer credit act guidelines i agree that if the debt isnt yours then you neednt ask them for proof but at the same time they do

need to be extremly honest with you and so in that respect they are legaly obliged to prove the debt is in your name and they have evidence of that before they get any the right to destroy your credit rating or a court order and if wescot try to do so without supplying evidence that youve requested under the above act then your entitle to challenge the court decision ps hope yur complaint has been successful very best to you

[cdj59]

forgt to say if you register a dispute with westcot theyre duty bound to investigate it or they breach the guidelines pretty much like theyv dun awlreddy eddy by ommission of the above act otherwise known as misleading you and i hope this helps you to get shot of wescot and i can say 4def ive got a bone to pick of my ain with lowell portfolio who told me the credit act doesnt cover mobile phones contracts lol give my regards to wescot 4me lol atb

[h8_Halifax]

4.2 It should be noted that, while the obligation under section 78(4) to

provide periodic statements in relation to running-account credit

agreements does not apply to small agreements, no such exclusion

applies in relation to the provision of copies and statements on a request

under section 78(1).

22 Taken from the consumer credit act guidelines i agree that if the debt isnt yours then you neednt ask them for proof but at the same time they do

need to be extremly honest with you and so in that respect they are legaly obliged to prove the debt is in your name and they have evidence of that before they get any the right to destroy your credit rating or a court order and if wescot try to do so without supplying evidence that youve requested under the above act then your entitle to challenge the court decision ps hope yur complaint has been successful very best to you

 

when i requested the "proof" they had i didn't actually mention the specific act. would my request for those details still be valid?

[locutus]

Mobile phones are NOT credit (ie the sale of money) so the customer credit act does not apply to them.

 

It is against the OFT guidelines to try to collect on a disputed debt, but "guidelines" are not laws.

 

Have you tried Ronan Dunne yet h8?

[h8_Halifax]

my letter to ronan dunne was "high jacked" by someone "at the highest possible level".

they are adamant that they will not do anything unless i give them a crime number ... without me having any proof that a crime has been committed or even why they think it's mine.

[cdj59]

when i requested the "proof" they had i didn't actually mention the specific act. would my request for those details still be valid?

Your request is valid and may i just say with respect to locutus that the oft`s guidelines are tied in to the law i e based upon case law and to say

otherwise would be like suggesting that guidelines such as dont harrass or coerce or mislead a debtor into payment isnt a breach of the law which it clearly is

and it can lead to fines as well as losing their licence to operate under the unfair trades act harrassment act and consumer protection acts of all types so with

respect short of a alterior motive to mislead or undermine those guidelines which those of us who are at the disposale of DCA`S have to rely upon due to the

dca...acting immorally please with respect check your facts because the guidlines wouldnt be in place if everyone in that buisness where as honest as they claim

 

sorry

h8 but its important that i correct a mistaken comment that could give you and others a false impression of your rights intentional or otherwise its important none

the less anyways ... So the dca in question wescot refered to the debt as a running credit agreement/ contract and as such it is by law obligated to

provide a true copy of the agreement and you should inform them that you believe that they are interfering with your rights and unless they provide what youve

requested within the expected timeframe that you will make a complaint to the oft and untill they provide evidence of the claimed debt they should cease all

activity against you in respect of collection of the seriously disputed debt ... another option and i promise not to make a habit of this but it does relate to your

situation so much infact that though i might be in trouble with the forums t&c i hope theyll let me of with a caution as i attempt to post a link which if youll

follow and scroll down to the very last but one entry will be of much benefit to you and many others in your \ my boat //

//forum.davidicke.com/archive/index. and to locutus no offence intended but it is a fact guidelines are there to protect us regardless of the impression you have and with much respect i take back my alterior remarks and apologise unreservedly but i believe that you yourself have been mislead of the

reality of those guidelines ..respect cdj ps h8 let me know how you get on and remember its up to wescot to prove the the debts yours not you to prove its not

good luck buddy. php/t-47240.html debt collection

[locutus]

remember its up to wescot to prove the the debts yours not you to prove its not you to prove its not

 

That is the only line you wrote that makes sense I'm afraid... and all Westcot have to say is that "we / o2 have investigate verified it is your debt".

 

H8. If you have been the victim on identity theft, report it to the police and get a crime reference... that will put an end to it once and for all.

[cdj59]

Tell them the account is in dispute with the original company, you have no contract with them and if they believe you do so...to produce it with the original signatures of both yourself and their representative and what the offer from them was.

 

Give them 7 days plus an additional 3 for the post by which time if the documentation is not forthcoming, no monies can be paid as no evidence exists. If the harass you with phone-calls, visits or letters after the account is shown to be in serious dispute...remind them of:

 

Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act

 

“S40 Punishment for unlawful harassment of debt

 

The Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

 

 

 

Section 40 of the act provides that a person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under contract, he or she:

1. harasses the other with demands for payment which by their frequency, or the manner or occasion of their making, or any accompanying threat or publicity are calculated to subject him or his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;
   
2. falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it;
   
3. falsely represent themselves to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment;
   
4. utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character or purporting to have some official character which he knows it has not.
   

Paragraph (1) above does not apply to anything done by a person which is reasonable (and otherwise legal) for the purpose of:

• of securing the discharge of an obligation due, or believed by him to be due, to himself or to persons for whom he acts, or protecting himself or them from future loss; or
  
• of the enforcement of any liability by legal process.
  

It is also provided that a person may be guilty of an offence under paragraph (1) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such action as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harrassment

 

 

Dear Sirs,

 

 

Please read the following notice thoroughly and carefully before responding. It is a notice. It informs you. It means what it says.

 

I refer to your letter dated xxx

 

As you are a third party intervener in this matter acting without authority, I DO NOT give you permission to interfere in my commercial affairs as you have no legal standing. I do not have a contract with you and any permission that you believe you may have , and any consent that you believe you may have, tacit or otherwise, is false and as i have no contract or agreement with your client nor you ether as representative or owner of the disputed debt i cannot accept your intervention in this serious dispute

as anything other than a wrongful engagement by your client which your action todate has allowed without fair investigation into my notice to you sent on the xxx and continued refusale to take that

notice as anything but serious as your responce to me can show. Please note.

 

I am familiar with the terms of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. And I believe, should you continue in contacting me after this request for you to cease your activity, that you will be guilty of harassment and blackmail, and you will be in breach of these acts, and you will be reported to the relevant bodies.

 

I am well aware of Section 40, sub-section (3) which you may consider entitles you to proceed. However upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury you will need to supply the following Proofs of Claims:

 

1. Proof of Claim that your actions are reasonable. and lawful based upon proper and right investigation

 

2. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is due, or believed by you to be due to you, and not due by some other party.

 

3a. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is to yourself by providing sight of the appropriate contract, or

 

3b. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part to persons for whom you act by providing sight of the appropriate contract.

 

4. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part protects you from any future loss.

 

5. Proof of Claim that any obligation on my part is enforcement of a legal process on a Human Being under Common Law jurisdiction, who cannot possibly have such liability under said jurisdiction.

 

You would of course need to provide these Proofs, including showing the full and audited accounting, and a true copy of the original agreement with its true t&c as stated at the time of the claimed contract which you need to produce if you chose to go to court to enforce payment

 

Please also note that if you contact me by telephone, after a formal request not to, you will also be in breach of the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1949) and, as such, I will report you to both Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading. And take further note that continued telephone calls after the receipt of a request not to call may constitute a criminal offence under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003.

 

Finally, you do not, nor have you ever had, my permission to use or process my personal data in any way, and so pursuant to the Data Protection Act 1998, I hereby demand that you cease use of any and all data with regard to me, and that you immediately destroy all of my data held on your records. Failure to do so will result in a report being submitted to The Information Commissioner for Data Protection breaches.

 

You will be deemed to have been served notice of my request and I will deem it served three (3) days from the date of this letter. This has been sent by recorded delivery. I am advising you that any communications from you outside of my request including but not limited to letters, phone calls and text messages received after this date will be recorded/noted with the intention of them being used as evidence.

please be aware that a copy of this letter has been kept for my own records and i hereby give formal notice that the claim of debt your pursuing from me is not

owed by me and untill you can prove otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt please

Do not contact me again.

 

Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity Again let me know how you get on and if you are

requested for a £1 fee under your original request remember to ask a friend or partner to supply theyre

name on the postal order clearly indicating the payment is for your cca request only otherwise just send

the first example letter above followed by the second if or when ignored or ether1 entirely up2 you h8

atb buddy hope this helps

[cdj59]

That is the only line you wrote that makes sense I'm afraid... and all Westcot have to say is that "we / o2 have investigate verified it is your debt".

 

H8. If you have been the victim on identity theft, report it to the police and get a crime reference... that will put an end to it once and for all.

 

respect and simply put the guidelines are drawn up based on caselaw and are legally enforceable in a court of law or by intervention of the oft and asscociated

gov bodies simplesz...see example just posted Respectfully without malice unless youve got evidence to the contrary its not a good thing to suggest to people

that the ofts guidelines are not law..thats my point and with `out further argument i withdraw from this side debate as obviously the thread isnt intended for that purpose and im just correcting what i see as misleading by stating the facts end of....

[cdj59]

my letter to ronan dunne was "high jacked" by someone "at the highest possible level".

they are adamant that they will not do anything unless i give them a crime number ... without me having any proof that a crime has been committed or even why they think it's mine.

 

The thing is i d theft while its a serious crime that should be reported i definatly agree with that but proof of it happening depends on evidence and if you stop to Think about it youd be hard pushed to supply evidence when the only person or persons who can provide that evidence refuse you access to it in preference to

collect money from you placing you as ether an avoider of debt or just plain responcible regardless to the point of witholding the information that you can use to

register a case of i d theft you might say obstructing justice by refusing you evidence that you can use to both clear yourself of responcibility and engage the police to aid you to do just that im not certain but you may be able to report a suspected case and report the dca as having the relevant details and refusing

your access too that. Which im certain even they know isnt acting reasonably never mind unlawfully but there is another possibility and that could be that wescot are infact playing you and god knows theres plenty of threads on here and elswhere to backup this theory so you could if you wanted too consult a soliciter or

a law center cab etc and tell them youve been placed in an impossible situation by the unreasonable actions of the dca and do this in tandem with the request perhaps getting backup to do that into the bargain .

 

The other point about wescot /02 laying claim to have done an investigation and having found you lible for the debt which if not supported with solid supporting

evidence that can stand up to scrutiny in a court of law would amount to misrepresentation to you and once youve sent that letter edited to suit your predicament

if needs be then, let them try to trick you by deciet and hell mend them and theyre kind .. so that isnt really a viable option for wescot th`o they might try it its

not legal /lawful till they prove it with solid evidence which giving the reluctance to provide it so far by idiotic measures and twisting the guidlines to suit that

reluctance they probly dont have any evidence and if you click onto my picture youll find those guidlines for yourself ...best wishes ps realizn this will probly be

too much for sum to take in but its experienced and lawfully based so atb to you and dont hesitate to ask if you need any thing else ...ttfn

Edited August 15, 2011 by cdj59
minor mistake

[cdj59]

yOU CAN FIND THE GUIDLINES VIA THREADS IVE POSTED ON I E.effects of debt on health and lifestyle...thats all folks

[h8_Halifax]

cdj59:

thanks very much for all the points you raise. although i do have a few queries:

 

 

1)

so the thing wescott quoted to me about being repayable in a single payment is a lie?

e.g.

"the cca shall not apply to a running-account credit agreement where the whole amount of the credit period is repayable in a single payment"

 

2)

the link you posted, i.e. forum.davidicke.com/archive/index.php

did you mean next to last on the entire page

i.e.

Premier Subscriber Features

or next to last on the main forums section

i.e.

Conspiratainment

 

either way, nothing happens when i click either link ... i simply get a screen clear and nothing.

 

3)

the last letter i had from O2 said speak to Wescot.

the last letter i had from Wescot was the "gimme £50 and an old phone to clear the debt" - 22 july.

however, Wescot had previously said that, as i had made a complaint, they would "suspend all collections activity ... whilst the matter [was] under investigation". and the they would contract me again "upon concluding [their] investigation" - 11 July.

 

as they have not yet informed me that their investigations are concluded i think that i should simply wait. when they finish, if this is still an issue, then i will certainly do what you say.

 

 

If you have been the victim on identity theft, report it to the police and get a crime reference... that will put an end to it once and for all.

the point is that i don't know if i have been a victim of identity theft. maybe it's an "honest" mistake by O2. the only way i can tell if this is identity theft is if someone will show me why they think this is my debt. maybe a contract, recording of telephone call, record of an internet order showing an exact date/time and IP address, ... anything!

until i have some sort of evidence then this is surely not a police matter and, imo, i would be simply wasting their time. furthermore, wouldn't the police expect me to give them at least some "proof"?

[h8_Halifax]

note to forum mods:

 

is it possible for me to change my nick to "H8_DCA's., telecomms giants, banks, Govt cuts ...

 

i've got another three pages if i can add those too please?

[h8_Halifax]

FYI

 

i have emailed my MP regarding DCA's reinterpreting the CCA & suggesting that some clarification would be helpful to "self-help" organisations, such as the CAG - especially at a time when Legal Aid funding is under threat.

[cdj59]

FYI

 

i have emailed my MP regarding DCA's reinterpreting the CCA & suggesting that some clarification would be helpful to "self-help" organisations, such as the CAG - especially at a time when Legal Aid funding is under threat.

 

Respect q1 Not a lie exactly but they only stated one part of the act and by quoting 78/4 and leaving out 78/1 theyve tried to mislead you hence their statement

to you about you not mentioning the specific act which can be viewed as a getout of jail card by blaming you

q2 yep im afraid as yet im not able to post links coz of only having x amounts of postings here so i had to split that link up , and i sort of figured it might not work

like that hence the reason ive copied the justice act and suggested letters from the thread there and the last post but1 from it is basicly a responce to the a responce from the dca to the person who started that thread which i`ll post after this one to you ill also upoad the pdf here with the guidlines i refered too on my

first post here to you.

 

q3 With respect to some of the advice youve been given here ive heard of people like you whove caved in and made payment to dca companys to get them off

their backs and far from that being the case the dca have used that as an excuse to claim other outstanding debts from them and al manner of problems have been caused from not high enough repayments etc etc so if you dont owe dont pay and that settlement offer sounds really odd not to mention desperate from them so dont pay and see if you jump into my page and checkout that thread i mentioned via all posts it will give you hope believe me ...ps h8 dca real cool nick

id join your club ANYtime lol .. so yeah dont get 2worried about it and the fact that theyre taking a long time to respond is probly coz their playing you as they do

hoping you will cave in . full respect mate tc ttfn:-D

OFT1272.pdf

oft298.pdf

[cdj59]

Ok, for anyone interested. I had a good look around and this is what I found.

 

I have now replied to the above email with this

 

Dear Customer services Rep,

 

Thank you for your email, the contents of which are noted. I must draw

your attention to the fact that this account is subject to a serious

dispute.

 

On the 17/09/2010 at 17:13 I wrote to your company requesting that you

provide a copy of the written contract, in this case the credit

agreement upon which this debt, which you claim a right to recover is

based. You will no doubt be aware that this debt is credit as defined

within the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and as a result, pursuant to

section 78(1) of the Act I may demand a copy of the credit agreement at

any time as long as the statutory fee of £1 is paid.

 

Your response to my request leaves me a little confused, I must point

out that it would appear that you have mis interpreted the law as your

response has major inaccuracies within it "Law Of Property 1925"

 

Secondly, you state that you are not the original creditor nor did you

provide the original credit facility. Now then, either way, you have a

duty to ensure that the correct documentation is provided.

 

If you are assigned a debt and the assignment is absolute, it would

come within section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925. Now surely you

will be aware of the definition of “Creditor” within the consumer

credit Act 1974, section 189(1) of the CCA 1974 states

 

"creditor " means the person providing credit under a consumer credit

agreement or the person to whom his rights and duties under the

agreement have passed by assignment or operation of law, and in

relation to a prospective consumer credit agreement, includes the

prospective creditor

 

Therefore if you are claiming that the assignment is absolute you have

the same duties as were placed upon the original creditor and MUST

supply me on demand with a true copy of the original agreement.

However, if you purport that the assignment is merely equitable and not

absolute I.e. you have the rights but none of the responsibilities

under the agreement, then I draw your attention to section 175 of the

CCA 1974

 

175.Duty of persons deemed to be agents.

 

Where under this Act a person is deemed to receive a notice or payment

as agent of the creditor or owner under a regulated agreement, he shall

be deemed to be under a contractual duty to the creditor or owner to

transmit the notice, or remit the payment, to him forthwith

 

So clearly, you would have a duty to pass my statutory request on to

**CREDITOR** for them to supply the information, I would like to point

out that the OFT guidelines on debt collection make it clear that all

collection activities should cease while a reasonably disputed debt is

investigated.

 

Also since you cannot provide a copy of the credit agreement, this

debt becomes unenforceable in law, furthermore, any rights to process

my personal data and defame my credit file would be contained within

the written contract, the contract which you do not appear to have!

 

I'm sure I don’t need to go over the vast amount of case law that has

been before the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords but I will

outline the facts from the Judgment of LORD NICHOLLS OF BIRKENHEAD in

the House of Lords Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D)

187 (Jul)

29. The court's powers under section 127(1) are subject to significant

qualification in two types of cases. The first type is where section 61

(1)(a), regarding signing of agreements, is not complied with. In such

cases the court 'shall not make' an enforcement order unless a

document, whether or not in the prescribed form, containing all the

prescribed terms, was signed by the debtor: section 127(3). Thus,

signature of a document containing all the prescribed terms is an

essential prerequisite to the court's power to make an enforcement

order.

 

Clearly No Credit Agreement, containing the prescribed terms as per

Consumer Credit Agreements Regulations 1983 Schedule 6 Column 2 and

signed by the debtor, that can be produced before the court means the

court cannot enforce the debt. This is mirrored in the following

cases….

 

Wilson and another v. Hurstanger Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 299

 

London North Securities Ltd & Mr and Mrs. Meadows [2005] EWCA Civ

956,

 

Dimond v. Lovell - [2000] Q.B. 216,

 

Rankine v Barclays Bank Plc [2005]

 

I'm sure your legal department will be aware of these cases, but

should they not be fully conversant, then I can provide copies of the

judgments

 

 

To clarify my position

 

I do not have any debt with your organisation, I do not acknowledge

any debt with your organisation and I shall not enter into any

negotiations to settle any debt you claim I have with your

organisation.

 

Until such time that you can produce before me a copy of the credit

agreement containing the prescribed terms in the prescribed form

bearing my signature, I will not discuss this matter further. Further

more, I put you on notice that any further attempts to collect this

debt or any harassment by your company to coerce me into paying you

monies before you provide me the documents that I requested, then I

shall issue you a letter before claim, complying with the pre action

protocol Para 4.3 placing you on notice that I will be issuing

proceedings in the Cheshire County Court against your organisation

seeking a judicial ruling pursuant to section 142(1) of the CCA 1974 to

determine the validity of this debt. I must point out that the court

has the power to discharge a debtor from their obligations under

section 142 and I am advised that any action that I could bring under

that section has an excellent prospect of success as the facts stand

and furthermore I would ask the court to consider costs in this matter.

 

I again invite you to provide access to the original agreement showing

that it contains the prescribed terms and is signed by both the

original creditor and myself. If you are unable to do so, then I would

invite you to give consideration to writing the balance off and closing

the account.

 

I am mindful of the fact that litigation would lead to added costs and

time on both sides and therefore I urge you to consider this situation

and act accordingly, from the advice I have received it is clear to me

that I have a good prospect of success based upon these arguments and I

do not wish to have to press this issue before the courts unless

totally necessary.

 

I respectfully request a response to this email within 7 days setting

out your position

 

Regards

 

I'll post any response if any. Note no responce was posted so ether there wasnt one which could suggest the dca gave up or the original poster gave up guess

we`ll never know

Edited August 16, 2011 by cdj59
reference to credit act and caselaw ref

[cdj59]

http://forum.davidicke.com/archive/index.php/t-47240.html full thread available here in respect of 3 mobile and o2 >debt collecting agencies >

 

theres a few arguments on this thread which interfere with its main purpose and a suggestion of not acknowledging the court system which is a political viewpoint

and one im interested in however in respect of not turning up at court to do with debt issues or dca court action against someone would not be advisable as

such refusale can result in a ruling being made against you and will not do your defence any good at all should you have one. ps not intended for anyone in particuler just posted the link to help with advice respect cdj59

Edited August 17, 2011 by cdj59

[locutus]

You still don't seem to grasp that the customer credit act plays no part in this. There is no credit.

You also seem to think that the OFT have more "powers" than they actually do. If the OFT finds something unfair, they can take the offending company / group to court. Until that point they can "Suggest" a fair practice, but they cannot force a business to change it's practices.

 

I do agree that the OP should not pay. They'll gain nothing from paying and the DCA will not go anywhere near a court with this.

[h8_Halifax]

cdj59

yr post #42 is amazing!

i have just got to use it!

many, many thanks.

[h8_Halifax]

that david icke post includes a link to a site with some debt solutions which look really fun ...

[cdj59]

locust With respect, though as yet its not included in the consumer credit act there is a view being taken that if the simcard is the exclusive property of a mobile company then technicaly you are just hiring that simcard paying for call credit.. in the terms of mobile phone contract theres clearly stated

that if you fail to make a payment then one of the options is to limit your credit so i suppose you could argue thats a difrent meaning of the word credit but essentialy its an exchange of cash for a service .. And with respect buddy the soul reason i brought up the credit act was in reply to wescot who themself mentioned it in theyre reply to h8 and minus the act i mentioned they do make use of that act especially the part that gets them out of supplying the request

from h8 and other than me extending that by showing the part they chose to leave out i wouldnt have mentioned it at all.. but clearly youve missed that part and

if you dont mind my saying if infact your right then im not the one who brought it up wescot are the source so i dont see why you feel the need to point it out as my mistake when its wescot who made that statement in the first instance ,,, as4 your other point , my point wasnt whether the oft had teeth to force a company to change theyre ways my point was to, challenge your statement to h8 that the guidlines arent law which you now seem to acknowledge .. respectfully weve both had our say and i do grasp the situation of the oft lacking of power its just you initially did seem to suggest the guidlines arent law but that wasnt the case regardless of the oft s ineffectiveness which youv only just brought up now and as you say untill they take the companys to court just like we could for breach of those guidelines you prove my point as correct though again the oft do have the power to remove the licence of operaters with fines without court process if they see fit to do so... beyond that both of us shall need to beg to differ and i cant see any point to this debate now respect ..

[cdj59]

that david icke post includes a link to a site with some debt solutions which look really fun ...

 

Uhuh lol glad to be of service and currently im awaiting a responce from lowel portfolio who ive told 3mobile breached my contract way back in 09 and,despite

resurfacing in april this year and selling the claimed debt to them and, saying that theyve got a clean bill of health, and im, responcible for that debt ,,im wandrn

anyway ive told the dca to give me details of the court they intend to use if they choose to go down that road so three weeks and counting if they ply pressure again ,,then yep some good ideas to take forward from that post, ..lol and post 42 yeah its good aint it...your welcome bud.. ATB h8_halifax:madgrin: cdj

[cdj59]

locust With respect, though as yet its not included in the consumer credit act there is a view being taken that if the simcard is the exclusive property of a mobile company then technicaly you are just hiring that simcard paying for call credit.. in the terms of mobile phone contract theres clearly stated

that if you fail to make a payment then one of the options is to limit your credit so i suppose you could argue thats a difrent meaning of the word credit but essentialy its an exchange of cash for a service .. respect ..

Creditor

 

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Creditors" redirects here. For the 1889 play by August Strindberg, see Creditors (play).

A creditor is a party (e.g. person, organization, company, or government) that has a claim to the services of a second party. It is a person or institution to whom money is owed. [1] The first party, in general, has provided some property or service to the second party under the assumption (usually enforced by contract) that the second party will return an equivalent property or service. The second party is frequently called a debtor or borrower. The first party is the creditor, which is the lender of property, service or money

[cdj59]

update:

 

i sent a "prove it" letter to westcott - no reply to that atm.

 

i also sent westcott a cca request with a £1 po.

they have replied saying:

they have no knowledge of any dispute;

they also say that the debt is not covered by sections 77-78 of the CCA.

"the cca shall not apply to a running-account credit agreement where the whole amount of the credit period is repayable in a single payment". they have returned my £1 po & my letter (i had sent them two letters in two separate envelopes).

they then repeat their pay within 14 days threat.

 

any thoughts on a next move please?

With respect locutus A running account credit agreement s77_78 of the cca minus sect 78/1 which does infact allow a request under the cca rules .guess the dca couldnt be bothered to read beyond the first part possibly cause it wasnt suited to them and as for the single payment thing in reality its only being presented as a lump sum by the dca and o2 when if you where responcible and did have an agreement you would have been billed by invoice monthly for a set amount each month...sorry h8