Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

CCA request rejected by DCA. Contravention of S175?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4633 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Please can I get some advice on this topic.

 

Other half has a £5K Credit Card debt from 2002

Financial difficulties lead to payments less than the minimum demanded.

Account terminated 2010. Payment since then of a token £5pm on the advice of CCCS

 

A DCA says they have been instructed by the Original Creditor to collect the balance on their behalf.

We sent a CCA request to the DCA with £1 fee. They returned it saying that the OC has instructed them that as they are not the creditor the request must be sent direct to the OC.

 

We returned the payment to the DCA and reminded them of their duty under S175 of the Consumer Credit Act that where they are acting for the OC they are responsible for dealing with the CCA request. We made it a Formal Complaint but got no response. After two weeks we chased up the complaint. They didn't reply to it but returned the payment for a second time, repeating that they are not the creditor, however this time we have the option of sending the payment to the DCA but made out to the OC and they will pass it on to the OC.

 

Now I am not sure if we are doing the right thing by insisting that the DCA deals with the whole request. Are they being reasonable asking for the payment to be made out to the OC?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The DCA has done the bare minimum in respect of complying with the CCA request, correct they don't have to supply it, or even forward your request onto the OC, however this is a good indicator of just how childish the DCA is and that they will be as equally stubborn in the future.

 

Send the CCA request direct to the OC, and have no further dealings with the DCA (who is it by the way?) inform the OC that their chosen third party DCA is incompetent and unprofessional, and as such you will not deal with them or any other circus outfit they choose to use, you will only deal with themselves.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you BB but forgive me if I say it wasn't the answer we expected. I viewed other topics and found this from the Consumer Credit Act. I thought that if the DCA is acting on behalf of the creditor and demanding the whole debt is paid, the debtor has the right to request the CCA from the DCA and the DCA must comply.

 

"S175. 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."

 

Can someone please clarify this point as it seems to be important. We don't want to refuse to deal with the DCA if they are correct that the payment must be made out to the OC. Shouldn't they also reply to our Formal Complaint properly?

 

My OH says not to reveal the name of the DCA yet until this is sorted out.

Edited by Artie44
Link to post
Share on other sites

The DCA has done the bare minimum in respect of complying with the CCA request, correct they don't have to supply it, or even forward your request onto the OC, however this is a good indicator of just how childish the DCA is and that they will be as equally stubborn in the future.

 

Send the CCA request direct to the OC, and have no further dealings with the DCA (who is it by the way?) inform the OC that their chosen third party DCA is incompetent and unprofessional, and as such you will not deal with them or any other circus outfit they choose to use, you will only deal with themselves.

 

That's a new one on me as well BB..... where did you get this from?

 

Artie.... is this Fred. International by any chance?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I engaged my bratty fingers before I engaged my melon head! :frusty:

 

What I mean is that a third party DCA can turn round and tell you that the CCA request must be sent to the OC.

 

Some will auto forward on your request to the OC, but others will do diddly squat just to frustrate the whole process for you.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I engaged my bratty fingers before I engaged my melon head! :frusty:

 

What I mean is that a third party DCA can turn round and tell you that the CCA request must be sent to the OC.

 

Some will auto forward on your request to the OC, but others will do diddly squat just to frustrate the whole process for you.

 

Ok.... no worries :-)

 

If the DCA is acting on behalf of the OC, then it would be very foolish to ignore a legal request when it's received, IMO..... providing you've retained proof that such a request was made.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I mean is that a third party DCA can turn round and tell you that the CCA request must be sent to the OC.

Some will auto forward on your request to the OC, but others will do diddly squat just to frustrate the whole process for you.

 

So what MUST a DCA do in response to a S78 CCA request as required by the Consumer Credit Act? I am not talking about the OFT Guidelines because they are only guidelines. Perhaps a forum legal expert could help please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what MUST a DCA do in response to a S78 CCA request as required by the Consumer Credit Act? I am not talking about the OFT Guidelines because they are only guidelines. Perhaps a forum legal expert could help please.

 

A DCA must comply with that request. That doesn't mean that you'll get an Agreement back, you may get an application..... but they need to send something; via the original creditor or otherwise. If not, the account is thrown "in dispute".

 

If they send an application and decide to run with that (as some do), then you need to follow it up with a letter asking for confirmation as to whether they have an actual Agreement or not under CPUTR 2008. To lie under CPUTR could have serious consequences and banks/DCAs are very reluctant to mess with it.

 

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so in this case they have returned the payment twice, saying we must make it payable to the OC.

Is my OH doing the right thing by sending it back to the DCA, with it still made out to the DCA?

 

It is now more than three months since the CCA request was made.

 

What should we do next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

With you now, I really must learn to read the posts properly!

 

They are splitting hairs and being bloody minded here.

 

Yes send it back to the DCA made payable to the OC, OR, cut out the immature clown outfit, and send the request direct to the OC with the payment enclosed, that would be my preferred method, and I would enclose a paragraph stating that their chosen third party DCA is a joke.

 

Send the DCA the failed letter.

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

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, my OH is worried about the DCA knowing about the postings on here and does not want the identity revealed until the situation is resolved.

What I can tell you is that almost the same scenario ocurred with another DCA representing a different OC but in that case they said the whole CCA request had to be made to the OC. After the payment was returned four times they sent the account back to the OC. That DCA was Robinson Way.

 

If it is the DCA's absolute duty to accept both the CCA request and payment made out to them, then they must comply and my OH does not want to help them avoid that duty.

 

Oh, and we already sent a detailed complaint letter but they have not replied to it despite a reminder.

Edited by Artie44
Link to post
Share on other sites

All that has occurred is typical so

please don't worry, some DCA's are just

plain lazy and awkward over this type

of situation, they believe they have some

kind of legal authority which they most

certainly DO NOT.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now please can you experts confirm the nitty gritty of this situation as I cannot find it elsewhere on the forum:

 

S175 seems to us to mean that when a DCA is acting for the OC it is the DCA's absolute duty to comply with a S78 CCA request. i.e. it is the DCA who must accept the £1 payment made out to them and seek to obtain the agreement fron the OC. Is that assumption the correct one, yes or no?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the wording is should not MUST, I stand to be corrected of course.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the wording is should not MUST, I stand to be corrected of course.

 

"S175. 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."

 

Isn't a duty a definitively absolute requirement?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now please can you experts confirm the nitty gritty of this situation as I cannot find it elsewhere on the forum:

 

S175 seems to us to mean that when a DCA is acting for the OC it is the DCA's absolute duty to comply with a S78 CCA request. i.e. it is the DCA who must accept the £1 payment made out to them and seek to obtain the agreement fron the OC. Is that assumption the correct one, yes or no?

 

Correct....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I ask one question based on the premise I put forward if you know

all this WHY are you asking the questions:?::?::madgrin:

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...