Cap1 & CCA return

[TideTurner]

Hi all

 

Off topic - but thought this might make you smile!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/post-608151.html

 

Regards, Pam

 

Hi Pam,

 

After the last week - definitely not the biggest, and no defence entered!

 

Details to follow.

 

Tide

[ladybird17]

AC - I'm now confused - why are you referring to the generic CC Mailer as a cedit token? The token is the credit card.

 

Prof. Fate - under S78 a copy of the executed agreement can be sent out without signatures - now they may well provide the original in court, and you would then hope that a judge would take into account "disclosure" issues.

[FANTASY CHARGES]

AC - I'm now confused - why are you referring to the generic CC Mailer as a cedit token? The token is the credit card.

 

Prof. Fate - under S78 a copy of the executed agreement can be sent out without signatures - now they may well provide the original in court, and you would then hope that a judge would take into account "disclosure" issues.

 

Q.1

 

does this copy of the executed agreement that can be sent out without signatures need to have your name or name and address on it ??

 

and next question

Q.2

 

what if a creditor referred to the "copy of the executed agreement" as the "the terms and conditions as well" what would the situation be ?

[angry cat]

Oh, I am so sorry ladybird my wording was ambiguous!

What I meant to convey is that MS could not (cannot) provide me with the alleged Agreement, then after approx. 7 months I received an apology for the delay in complying with my request! However, the doc. that I was sent was the MS T&C's that were written on a credit card mailer; the type that a new credit card is attached to but the new credit card (credit token) was missing. This credit card mailer was a 2006 issue but it has a 2004 issue date at the top, it has a zero credit limit. An emphasis must be placed upon the fact that the mailer/T&C's had two MS bank issue dates, being 2004 & 2006 but the T&C's show the penalty/default charge as £12, as opposed to £20 which would have been the penalty charge back in 2004. Obviously the doc is clearly 2006

 

In 2004 my credit limit was not zero, as I had a PPI claim in place, the credit card has not been used since late 2002, with exception to PPI monthly premiums that were taken and treated as transactions.

 

MS reduced my credit limt after my PPI claim ended and then when I went into dispute re: unlawful charges; my credit limit was reduced to zero.

 

I could go on but my rambling would only confuse the issue regarding comments about 1983 regs, regulation 3 versus regulation 7.

 

My brain feels quite frazzled, it saturday and ...I am going to have a nice glass of cold chardonnay.

 

Love AC

 

 

Love AC

[Peterbard]

ther still seems to be some confussion ofer the transitional arrangements of the new regulations these are all laid out in the OFTFaq and at the end of the 2006 regs.

 

The varios dates are listed here the revocation of section127(3) is highlghted

 

Date Provision(s) coming into force

Disapplication of s.101 of the 1974 Act (s.63)

Miscellaneous/technical provisions (ss.65-69)

June 2006

Enabling powers for SIs to be made later on, and other

‘supporting’ provisions

1 October

2006 (CCD)

Extension of period to respond to default notices (s.14 (1))

Late 2006 Change to definition of an individual (s.1)

6 April 2007 Abolition of automatic unenforceability (s.15)

(CCD) Unfair relationships (ss.19-22) for new agreements (there will

be a one-year transitional period (i.e. until April 2008) before the

test applies to existing agreements)

Alternative dispute resolution provided by FOS (ss.59-61 and

Schedule 2)

6 April 2008 Removal of financial limit (s.2)

(CCD) High net worth and business exemptions (ss.3-4)

Post-contract transparency (ss.6-14, 16-18)

Licensing regime and OFT powers (ss.23, 26-54, 62, 64)

Consumer Credit Appeals Tribunal (ss.55-58, Schedule 1)

1 October

2008 (CCD)

New categories of business – debt administration and credit

information services (ss.24-25)

 

Regards

Peter

[Peterbard]

I'm not sure that's right. I think a court will be able to enforce an agreement whether it is signed or not, depending on the circumstances.

 

It will only be for new agreements, though, and will not be retrospective.

HI

I forgot to lind this to my last post

 

In addition though the 2006 transitional arrangements state that this particular revocation of the none enforceability ammendment is not retrospective and only applies to agremnt made on or after april 6th 2007.

Any agreements made before that will still be unenforceable if they have no debtor sig or prescribed terms.

Peter

[Cristal]

Oh, I am so sorry ladybird my wording was ambiguous!

What I meant to convey is that MS could not (cannot) provide me with the alleged Agreement, then after approx. 7 months I received an apology for the delay in complying with my request! However, the doc. that I was sent was the MS T&C's that were written on a credit card mailer; the type that a new credit card is attached to but the new credit card (credit token) was missing. This credit card mailer was a 2006 issue but it has a 2004 issue date at the top, it has a zero credit limit. An emphasis must be placed upon the fact that the mailer/T&C's had two MS bank issue dates, being 2004 & 2006 but the T&C's show the penalty/default charge as £12, as opposed to £20 which would have been the penalty charge back in 2004. Obviously the doc is clearly 2006

 

In 2004 my credit limit was not zero, as I had a PPI claim in place, the credit card has not been used since late 2002, with exception to PPI monthly premiums that were taken and treated as transactions.

 

MS reduced my credit limt after my PPI claim ended and then when I went into dispute re: unlawful charges; my credit limit was reduced to zero.

 

I could go on but my rambling would only confuse the issue regarding comments about 1983 regs, regulation 3 versus regulation 7.

 

My brain feels quite frazzled, it saturday and ...I am going to have a nice glass of cold chardonnay.

 

Love AC

 

 

Love AC

 

For what it's worth, I too have just rec'd something similar from MS - an undated 'Your New MS Card us here, call....to activate...' It has my acc't number and under 'Number of Cards', 'Nil' and under 'Your Total Credit Limit', 'N/A' and is signed by a Marketing Director. Also included are pages of 'Account Overview' (loaded with overlimit charges, etc.) and 2 pages of 'MS Card Conditions'. No signatures anywhere, no credit limit, no 'your right to cancel'. I am replying that this is not a properly executed agreement, etc and will let you know what happens!

[m55dlc]

Oh, I am so sorry ladybird my wording was ambiguous!

What I meant to convey is that MS could not (cannot) provide me with the alleged Agreement, then after approx. 7 months I received an apology for the delay in complying with my request! However, the doc. that I was sent was the MS T&C's that were written on a credit card mailer; the type that a new credit card is attached to but the new credit card (credit token) was missing. This credit card mailer was a 2006 issue but it has a 2004 issue date at the top, it has a zero credit limit. An emphasis must be placed upon the fact that the mailer/T&C's had two MS bank issue dates, being 2004 & 2006 but the T&C's show the penalty/default charge as £12, as opposed to £20 which would have been the penalty charge back in 2004. Obviously the doc is clearly 2006

 

In 2004 my credit limit was not zero, as I had a PPI claim in place, the credit card has not been used since late 2002, with exception to PPI monthly premiums that were taken and treated as transactions.

 

MS reduced my credit limt after my PPI claim ended and then when I went into dispute re: unlawful charges; my credit limit was reduced to zero.

 

I could go on but my rambling would only confuse the issue regarding comments about 1983 regs, regulation 3 versus regulation 7.

 

My brain feels quite frazzled, it saturday and ...I am going to have a nice glass of cold chardonnay.

 

Love AC

 

 

Love AC

 

AC, this is what is known as objective conjecture (as to what your agreement should look like) and is against the guidelines of the regulatory authorities. It is like saying 'please don't renew my credit license'.

 

PM me, we're handling these differently

[paulwlton]

If the creditor hasn't complied with sec2(1) then imo they remain in default.

Legibility of notices and copy documents and wording of prescribed Forms

2.-(1) The lettering in every notice in a Form prescribed by these Regulations and in every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act shall, apart from any signature, be easily legible and of a colour which is readily distinguishable from the colour of the paper.

[ladybird17]

I'm awfully sorry - I know it's Saturday & we're all testing the vino, but none of the last few posts make any sense to me at all. Perhaps I am "in vino veritas"

But if I try to comprehend, AC - a copy of a generic CCmailer hardly cuts the cookie in response to a CCA request.

Other than that - who has drunk the MOST?

I think I will revert to playing Spider Solitaire!

[zubo]

Saturday vino person here... actually I'll remain the Stella lager lout thank you...

 

what are we going on about here...

 

it's like everyone seems to have accepted that the legislation says no signatures are required... Peter you been converted to the dark side...

 

been spinning too many spells.... a true copy should be exactly that, a true copy of you original agreement signed and dated at least by you, with any other document it relies on and including the prescribed terms.

Anything else fails the tests and you should write and place the Creditor in default.

 

Z

[pford]

Anything else fails the tests and you should write and place the Creditor in default.

 

Z

erm can we set our own CRA up for all the banks defaults

damm sure most will be above a 8

or would it be 9876543210 but then when you get to an 8 all past data is lost so just a big 8

[un1boy]

erm can we set our own CRA up for all the banks defaults

damm sure most will be above a 8

or would it be 9876543210 but then when you get to an 8 all past data is lost so just a big 8

Could try writing to the bank of england, afterall it is they whom lend them all their money!

[Perseus]

Prof. Fate - under S78 a copy of the executed agreement can be sent out without signatures - now they may well provide the original in court, and you would then hope that a judge would take into account "disclosure" issues.

 

Surely he/she would just then wrap their knuckles and confirm the debt is enforceable!

Q.1

 

does this copy of the executed agreement that can be sent out without signatures need to have your name or name and address on it ??

 

Any agreement you have to apply for, sign, and get authorised should be provided on its' acceptance surely? So - IMO if they send out a generic mailer/T&C's or a copy of an old agreement for joe bloggs 200 miles away, it's not their acceptance of your application, so yes - surely it must have your Name, Address, credit limit, APR, PPI, payment date etc - regardless of omissions of signatures and copies of any security insutrument such as copy drivers license/utility bill/passport etc?

If I apply for HP - there's normally a triplicate NCR form, all details re CCA, my details, their details etc, prescribed terms. I get accepted, and walk away with a copy of that agreement in my hand....

 

a true copy should be exactly that, a true copy of you original agreement signed and dated at least by you, with any other document it relies on and including the prescribed terms.

Anything else fails the tests and you should write and place the Creditor in default.

 

Z

Yeah!

[m55dlc]

Argh

 

Another phone call from HBOS call centre regards a Sainsbury's bank card. You speak to one of them and they are allowed to call 5 times a day, speak to another one and they are allowed to speak to you 4 times a day. Speak to another one and they are allowed to speak to you 3 times for each number they hold, yet not one of them have heard of the administration of justice act, or understand harrassment. I had one guy who said Oftel guidelines, but when pressed he didn't know any more.

 

How can we stop these companies from misinforming their workforce with regards to the law?

[Guest Battleaxe]

It is down to education and trusting that the trainers of these companies are au fait themselves with the relevant regulations.

[zubo]

BA

 

you know I just had a post removed after yours because all it said was dammit BA you pipped me too it (in response to m55 comments re p300).

 

blimey, mr cagman that was a little harsh considering a good 50% of all posts in this thread are fairly light and informal jokey posts...

 

Anyway, true BA, we talked about the lack of education staff have had - I would bet a lot of money I owe that this is now being corrected - but not to how you would hope, more along the lines of - how to legitamately respond to a request and divulge little information. - eg the now common response to CCA 77/78 requests to sending completely unsigned agreements...

 

We need to push harder for this info...

 

Z

[alanfromderby]

BA

 

you know I just had a post removed after yours because all it said was dammit BA you pipped me too it (in response to m55 comments re p300).

 

blimey, mr cagman that was a little harsh considering a good 50% of all posts in this thread are fairly light and informal jokey posts...

 

 

 

LOL....I will leave you all in peace now we have reached page 300.

[ian1969uk]

Hi, I am going to do my S85 default notices today for my credit cards, and was looking at this letter that someone on here posted (sorry, forget who, but thanks!):

 

NOTICE OF DEFAULT

Served under Section 85(1)

Of

The Consumer Credit Act (1974) as amended

Creditor:

Account No:

 

You are duly notified that you a have been in default under the aforementioned section of the above Act since dd/mm/yyyy.

In order to correct this breach all interest payments made since dd/mm/yyyy must be consolidated.

 

To correct this, consolidation must be made within 1 month of this notice.

 

If the correction required by this notice is taken before the date of expiry of this notice then no further action will be taken in respect of the breach.

 

If the action required by this notice is not taken within 1 month of this notice then the default will be registered with a credit reference agency.

 

 

 

Notes under Section 85(2)

 

(a) The Creditor is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement; and

 

(b) If the default continues for one month the creditor commits an offence.

 

Signed

 

 

Just one question, though. The letter states that we will register the default with the credit reference agencies.

Can we actually do this and if so, how? I don't want to send a letter containing an empty threat as I will have no recourse should they just ignore me.

Any advice?

[JonCris]

They'll probably ignore you but in anticipation why not write to the CRA's Tell them you wish to register a default against the lender.

 

After all they 'pride' themselves & would have us believe they are the 'guardians' of consumer credit industry so surely it's just as important for them to know which companies are actualy flouting the law! Also they seem to let any Tom Dick or Harry (who can pay) use their services

 

Would the site consider having a default register where their failure to supply documents within the statutory time limit can be recorder for all registered members to see?

[paulwlton]

Could I just ask something please, I have an agreement document which appears to have all the prescribed terms and signatures, but I read previously somewhere that the particulars of the loan had to be in some specific order with interest shown before or after the loan figures, not sure which. anyway, this is the order which is on my agreement document and I wonder if someone might confirm this is correct or not: thanks

 

Order on agreement went:

Advance 13k

Credit Care Gold - 5956 ( insurance)

Amount of credit - 18956

Interest - 5296

Total amount payable 24253

 

If the insurance is stated as optional in the agreement then it can be included in the amount of credit if it doesn't and is included in the credit then i believe the agreement is unenforceable.

[Guest Battleaxe]

One problem there JonCris, the CRA's wont respond to us mere mortals as we don't pay for their services and don't hold a license. We do need a Register though. i have served three Section 85's and MBNA said I am wrong they are right, but guess what, they wanted to talk to me about it. I haven't, they cancelled the telconference, so last week I have pushed ahead with litigation. We will soon see who is right and who is wrong.

 

PS AlanfromDerby, was it you who cagbotted me? I only answered a question.

[Guest Battleaxe]

LOL....I will leave you all in peace now we have reached page 300.

 

Alanfromderby, I hope it wasn't you.

[InKogneeToh]

Hi

 

I'm not really sure if and how an individual could register a default against a creditor with the CRAs but you could always create a 'notice of correction' that the CRA must add to your file with them (and disclose on any credit check) and put the details there. This way, any further check of your credit file by anyone would display this notice!

 

e.g.

 

TAKE NOTICE THAT THIS CREDITOR (NAME) HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS UNDER SECTION 85 OF THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 AND AS A CONSEQUENCE IS BARRED FROM ENFORCING THIS AGREEMENT.

 

THIS CREDITOR HAS ALSO COMMITTED A SUMMARY OFFENCE UNDER THE AFOREMENTIONED LEGISLATION BY FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE STATUTORY OBLIGATIONS WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME LIMIT SPECIFIED.

 

 

I like it!!!!

 

:lol:

 

 

Regards, Pam

[ian1969uk]

Now Pam, that's a brilliant idea!

 

Only thing is, it won't encourage lenders to do business with us in the future will it, as they will know that we know our rights and won't make things easy for them.