I just don't need all that stress again

[Bazooka Boo]

Your doing all the hard work, we're simply pointing you in the right direction (hopefully! )

 

Well advising certainly!

[Chrissie1980]

Ok so I have an update, Cabot are refusing to close the account and said they are keeping it on hold after 2 years and that they will contact me "when" they receive the agreement. But they have had 2 years.....

 

Also Mackenzie Hall sent me a letter back stating they have given the creditor 40 days to find my agreement but thats not right?

 

The other 2 I am wiating for a response which the 12 days are up on the 15th.

 

So what should I do about Cabot's response and MH?? Also I know about the clause with the asking for the agreement as by law they are supposed to have it already when they buy the debt, is there a letter I can send with regards to this??

 

Thanks :o)

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

That's a complaint to OFT I think.

The time scale it unfair and unreasonable.

You could write to Cabot and MH in that vein

and head it final response.

 

'' I consider that the time scale you have been allowed

is more than reasonable but considering the stress caused

by your inaction I now consider any further time for you

to fulfill my lawful request is unfair and unreasonable,

I am compiling a complaint to the OFT and Consumer Direct,

and in view of this please consider this my FINAL RESPONSE

no further communication will be made any correspondence

from you will returned unopened.

 

Yours stroppily

 

P**sed OFF

[Chrissie1980]

Thanks I'll see what they say now after this letter :o) thanks you so much for your advice

[brokebutnotbeatn]

Ah Brigs - you are sounding more like Boo every day

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Your'e welcome, GOOD LUCK:madgrin:

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I guess it's a question of GREAT MINDS etc.

[Bazooka Boo]

If Brig was like me he would say....

 

Dear Cr@pbot, thank you for confirmation that you are merely being a childish pain in the back side. Any further correspondence from you will be fed to my pet guinea pigs.

 

Dear Muckhall, I have no idea what planet you are on, least of all what legislation you claim to abide by, but in the 40 days you profess you require to collate the information you require to enforce any such action against myself, I will have had sufficient time to move address, change name, and aquire a competent legal team in order to wring you dry and make you more laughable than you already are.

 

12 working days from receipt of your request is ALL they are entitled too, if the clowns cannot or will not supply the agreement in that time, then the account is in dispute, and NO payments are to be made on that account, no matter how hard they beg and plead, even if they try the old "morale obligation" sketch......

[brokebutnotbeatn]

hahaha. Baby steps Boo! x

[Chrissie1980]

Hi guys well good news I have heard nothing from any of my creditors with regards to my request for the agreement so I am assuming they don't have it!! Now is there anyway of claiming the money back I have paid them or do I just call it quits now and move on? Thanks again for all your help

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi Chrissie, Sorry it doesn't work that

way they may not have the agreement

but you have acknowledged the debt

by making payments.

 

Brig.

[Chrissie1980]

No the last payment made to them was about 3 years ago, before I asked for the agreement.

[zubo]

Hey Chrissie

 

You have some b++ls girl!!!!

 

... best advice I ever had was to leave things alone.... its a bit of a variation of the old saying.... 'why fix it if its not broken'.... you could read that in this context as 'if its broken dont fix it'....

 

.... however I disagree with Brig....

 

there is a discrete body of law recognized by the HOL on 6 June 1991 (although this has evolved for over 200 years) which is based upon the body of law known as the law of restitution.

In brief the law is concerned about when restitutionary remedies may be awarded.

One of the different types of action this body of law considers is the reversal of a defendant's unjust enrichment. In simple terms you could argue that you had made payments believing that the Creditor was entitled to receive those payments, however you and they were mistaken because no contract exists between you... therefore they were unjustly enriched.

The law is very new... and there is a lot to prove.... but as I stated earlier... there IS a body of law should you wish to pursue this further.

 

Z

[cerberusalert]

The problem with that argument is the original credit agreement (the contract) does exists, even if the limitation period has passed although unenforceable through a court a debt does still legally exist.

[Chrissie1980]

Thanks guys I thought that might be the case..... Just wanted to know if there was going to be some compensation for what that "not very nice man" left me with but sadly not

[zubo]

and that is your starting point.....

 

you need to establish that the contract is null and void .. in terms of the law therefore there was no contract, or indeed that there IS a contract. You could argue that if the contract does not comply with the CCA then the contract should be declared null and void since it was entered into in the mistaken belief that it complied with the act....

 

Z

[Chrissie1980]

But there is no evidence of a contract as the agreement has been lost or distroyed.

[cerberusalert]

Thanks to certain court cases they can reconstruct an agreement and it would be accepted.

[zubo]

I dont know what happened to my post...

 

ok.... so the contract is the starting point..... you need to get this declared null and void....

 

you could argue that the contract should have complied with the CCA and you entered into it in the mistaken belief that it did.... therefore..... the contract should be declared null and void.

 

IF there is NO contract then.... you can commence your action for restitution....

 

you could as I have done, use this as part of your communications with the Creditor to recover money they owe you.

 

... and no is the answer.... nobody has paid me anything... yet .... but it is a great threat to the Creditor.... having the possibility of a counter claim!

 

Z

[Chrissie1980]

How can they just contruct an agreement, surely it has to be signed?

[zubo]

Thanks to certain court cases they can reconstruct an agreement and it would be accepted.

 

really???? a link would useful and the legal argument

[Chrissie1980]

Thanks Zubo you are a great help Is there any letters I should write to them now the 30 day period is up and the fact they failed to comply with my request?

[cerberusalert]

Have a read through this thread; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?314597-Challenging-Reconstituted-Agreements...&highlight=reconstructed+agreements

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I have read some of the ''restitution'' I

seriously doubt that it will have any great

impact on CCA 1974 matters, as you say

cerbs the one certain thing is the debt still

exists stat barred or not.

[cerberusalert]

The problem is if they take you to court on the back of a reconstructed agreement you have a slim chance of a defence, whereas if you take them to court all they have to prove basically is that you have had the money as proven with the case of a cut up MBNA card which was produced in evidence. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?179236