Cap1 & CCA return

[pford]

Your set-aside application should include the statement that the court has made an error in law & then explain why

dosen't need a set-aside yet needs a defence to their claim

[TideTurner]

Just as a matter of interest, I have also been in touch with TS. They have two different sections. One deals with criminal offences and another deals with civil matters. The failure to supply an agreement after 12 working days plus one month is, according to my TS a criminal matter and that is what she is dealing with. She has said they are reluctant to prosecute as they are under resourced, a fact that has also been confirmed by a senior office with the authority. She has also said that once she has sorted out that side (presumably by getting a copy of the agreement and all relevant documents), she will no longer deal with any complaint but I can pursue it with the civil side of the authority (ie any errors within the body of the documents that may render the agreement unenforceable)

I only give this information as I suspect the person who has written to you is on the criminal side and may not be able to deal with the civil side.

Mind you it's still a useless answer you were sent!

 

I've never heard so much crap in my life!

 

Two sections. One Civil, one Criminal, but we cannot proceed with any Criminal actions as we are under resourced.

 

Yes TS, you do proceed with criminal action when the other side is a small vulnerable business who won't kick up too much of a fuss, and haven't the legal backing of an opposition like the banks. You don't have to commit so many resources or risk losing your corner because your staff don't have anything like the amount of training and education the banks pump into their staff.

 

Peoples Friend? Under funded try hards.

 

Tide

[AnimalMagic]

Animal Magic

 

Have a look at the OFT guidelines on pursuit of debtors by creditors, also Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act ...wrongful pursuit of a debt.

Its the word wrongful you have to look at here.

might be useful

 

sparkie

 

That's what I was looking for... Thanks Sparkie

[angry cat]

I've never heard so much crap in my life!

 

Two sections. One Civil, one Criminal, but we cannot proceed with any Criminal actions as we are under resourced.

 

Yes TS, you do proceed with criminal action when the other side is a small vulnerable business who won't kick up too much of a fuss, and haven't the legal backing of an opposition like the banks. You don't have to commit so many resources or risk losing your corner because your staff don't have anything like the amount of training and education the banks pump into their staff.

 

Peoples Friend? Under funded try hards.

 

Tide

 

 

I am given to understand that TS do not appear to have a problem with prosecuting small business's...e.g. the poor old baker who underwieghs his 400 or 800 grm loaf of bread!

 

However, TS appear to be putting up obstacles re: prosecuting banks who have comitted a Criminal Offence under S78 the CCA 1974.

 

Personally, I have sent all the relevant letters back to my TS - OFT, DTI, Right Hon. Ian McCatrney, LACORS plus my reasoning as to why TS are wrong.

However, I definately get the impression that I am bashing my head against a 'Brick Wall'.

 

Perhaps, it would be a good idea to start a thread re: the TS experiences of caggers who are attempting TS enforcement and those that have been turned down, giving the reasons that they have been given by TS as to why they will not prosecute.

Of course, when there are sufficient numbers, use that information to show that TS are not doing there job.

 

Love AC

[BLADES65]

Marbles Credit Card

 

CCA request sent 5th May 2007

 

Signed for 10th May 2007

 

Today received a recorded letter back from HFC dated 30th may 2007.

 

The package included last 6 months statements but NO Agreement.

 

The letter states:

 

Dear Mrs xxxxx

 

Account Number xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter dated 4th May 2007 requesting information regarding the above account.

 

Please find below the account information relating to your account in accordance with section 77 of the Consumer Credit Act.

 

 

Date Account Opened xxxxxxxxxxxx

Payment Due Date xxxxxxx

Original Credit Limit xxxxxxxxxx

Last Payment Amount xxxxxxx

Current Balance xxxxxxxx

Account Status xxxxxxxxxx

 

Please find enclosed a statement of account, please note we are still trying to locate a copy of yopur legal agreement, which will be forwarded in due course, the statement enclosed will list any payments received or charges incurred to date.

 

I trust the information I have provided to you is to your satisfaction but should you require anything further, please do not hestitate to contact me.

 

 

Your sincerely

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXX

Senior Payment Advisor

HFC Bank limited

 

 

What should I do now?

[yaffsimone1]

Marbles Credit Card

 

CCA request sent 5th May 2007

 

Signed for 10th May 2007

 

Today received a recorded letter back from HFC dated 30th may 2007.

 

The package included last 6 months statements but NO Agreement.

 

The letter states:

 

Dear Mrs xxxxx

 

Account Number xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter dated 4th May 2007 requesting information regarding the above account.

 

Please find below the account information relating to your account in accordance with section 77 of the Consumer Credit Act.

 

 

Date Account Opened xxxxxxxxxxxx

Payment Due Date xxxxxxx

Original Credit Limit xxxxxxxxxx

Last Payment Amount xxxxxxx

Current Balance xxxxxxxx

Account Status xxxxxxxxxx

 

Please find enclosed a statement of account, please note we are still trying to locate a copy of yopur legal agreement, which will be forwarded in due course, the statement enclosed will list any payments received or charges incurred to date.

 

I trust the information I have provided to you is to your satisfaction but should you require anything further, please do not hestitate to contact me.

 

 

Your sincerely

 

XXXXXXXXXXXXX

Senior Payment Advisor

HFC Bank limited

 

 

What should I do now?

 

 

Ah, that is a standard letter, i had one exactly the same from HFC regarding my John Lewis account, and yes they only enclosed 6 months worth of statements aswell. They sent mine to me by Special Delivery was yours delivered in the same way?

 

I'm not going to reply to it, they are aware of thier legal obligations and i buggered if im going to keep reminding them of it!

[BLADES65]

Yes, came by special delivery this morning.

 

I have a feeling they don't have the agreements.

 

I'm still waiting for 4 more CCA requests from HFC, all over the 12 days just waiting for the extra 30 before sending off non compliance letters.

[yaffsimone1]

Yes, came by special delivery this morning.

 

I have a feeling they don't have the agreements.

 

I'm still waiting for 4 more CCA requests from HFC, all over the 12 days just waiting for the extra 30 before sending off non compliance letters.

 

John Lewis's 12 + 30 are up on the 14 June.

 

I wont send them a non-compliance i will just complaint straight to OFT and TS. Like i said im not going to keep reminding them of thier obligations. The longer they fail to produce the agreement the better for me.

 

This is a quote from Laiste (who is very good, i hope she doesnt mind me using it) has changed my way of thinking:-

 

I think it is easy to fall into the trap of pursuing the recipient of the CCA request, and I can understand why it seems to be the logical thing to do. Also, given that there are a number of people on here giving advice which encourages sending the stop telephoning me letter, I am not at all surprised that people follow this advice. I think I am very much in the minority on here suggesting doing things differently. I will say though, I have helped a number of people (not on here) who have done what I advise and it has worked out very much to their

advantage!

 

Law is as much about tactics as it is about understanding the Common Law and legislation. It is unfortunate that some people dispensing advice are not doing it having considered the full implications for the debtor. Yes, calls from creditors and DCA's are a royal pain, but I think it is better to put up with calls from these morons for a period of time, rather than take the easy and IMO foolish option of sending a letter that may end up leaving you with no claim for damages, but still saddled with the debt! It's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned!

 

The other and far more important consideration which I forgot to include in Cristal's thread is this, if you start sending letters filled with legal jargon, and advising said company of their unlawful/illegal conduct, you will alert them to the fact that you are legally savvy, so they will be disinclined to take you to Court. Well what's wrong with that, some people reading this will say? Well, until a Court claim is issued, the matter will rumble on and on......preventing you from getting on with your life! It also means that if they a weak case, or screw it up for some reason, they can't come after you again, they only get the one shot! By lulling them into a false sense of security, so that they think you're a bit dim, because you haven't responded to any of their calls/letters, they believe you're running scared and that if they issue a claim, you'll be easy pickings and are unlikely to defend the claim! Once they do this, when you file your def and c/c, they are locked into the situation and either have to go to Court, which they won't want to do, given the harassment you've documented in your claim, or they will have to pay you compensation, as the hope is their case will be very weak! It has to be said, their position is very much weakened even if they have a good case, if you have compelling issues to raise, such as harassment! Given the respective bargaining power of the creditor and the debtor, the creditor has it all and the debtor has none; it is hardly going to sit well with the Court, if the creditor, who has all the power, is seen battering the debtor into submission by the most aggressive and unreasonable means. I don't think the Judge is going to accept that the creditor telephoned 10 times a day for a period of 5mnths because he really liked the debtor and just fancied a chat!

 

You would be surprised what will make a creditor run away, so if you have a detailed account of harassment, perhaps Data Protection Act 1998 breaches, given that your personal info has been distributed to everyone apart from the milkman, defamation and the icing on the cake, (hopefully)-no agreement, or a fatally flawed one, you can make them suffer big time! Oh and when you're finished taking their money off them, you can report them to the OFT and hopefully get them stripped of their credit licence or given a great big fine as the OFT's powers have been increased as of April this year! Banks, credit card companies and DCA's are bullies, but if they are up against a competent opponent, especially one who has a long detailed account of harassment, amongst other issues, he is not likely to want the matter to end up in front of a Judge!

 

Maybe worth thinking about

[pford]

In the dail Mirror today

 

ENRAGED!

 

Bully banks use automatic dialling to harass debtors

 

30/05/2007

 

 

BANKS are using bullying "torture" techniques to hound customers with cash problems.

They use automatic phone systems to ring up to 15 times a day demanding payment with calls that can be aggressive and threatening.

We've heard complaints from several distressed readers.

 

 

read it here

 

ENRAGED! - Mirror Money - Money News - News - Mirror.co.uk

[rippedoffagain]

Ok boys and girls. My bank have ignored my CCA request, save to send me a copy of application form, no prescribed terms.

 

I have written to them three times advising them of there non compliance. There response received recently:-

 

I confirm that we have sent you a copy of your agreement with previous correspondence.

 

In the same post:-

 

Final Notice, bla bla. Legal Action bla bla. Collector to call etc etc.

 

So, advice please.

 

A) Ignore and let them dig themselves deeper, as per Laiste's advice.

B) Report them to Trading Standards / OFT.

C) Write back and inform them of their error.

[pudsters14]

I've been going through a CCA request with Argos and the application form they have provided me with does not contain all the prescribed terms. They have today, even through I sent them a letter on the 22.05.07 and the 16.05.07 sent me a default notice.

 

I have already written to them about their continuing harrassment and informed them that they still haven't fulfilled my reqest

 

I was going to send a letter today stating that they are continuing to be unlawful and they do not have any rights to be lodging defaults or passing my information etc... would you advise this?

 

Also my friend has asked me about internet applications and online signatures... where does he stand as he never signed a credit agreement... is there a thread you can direct me to?

 

Thanx

 

Pudsters14

[BLADES65]

Letter just received.

 

Wescott have passed account back to HFC Bank after CCA request so they can deal with it direct.

 

Anyone else had anything like this occur.

 

I am assuming thay cannot produce the agreement.

[hisholinessthepope]

Apologise now but can anyone offer assistance on a new thread I have started?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/94309-no-cca-agreement-unenforceable.html

[Peterbard]

I've been going through a CCA request with Argos and the application form they have provided me with does not contain all the prescribed terms. They have today, even through I sent them a letter on the 22.05.07 and the 16.05.07 sent me a default notice.

 

I have already written to them about their continuing harrassment and informed them that they still haven't fulfilled my reqest

 

I was going to send a letter today stating that they are continuing to be unlawful and they do not have any rights to be lodging defaults or passing my information etc... would you advise this?

 

Also my friend has asked me about internet applications and online signatures... where does he stand as he never signed a credit agreement... is there a thread you can direct me to?

 

Thanx

 

Pudsters14

Hi

electronic agreements are permited courtessy of the electronic comunication act 2004,there has to be in place of the signature bosx details of how the debtors signature is to be interpreted usually a tick box.

The cancesllation arrangements are the same as outlined in the distance marketing agreements and the cancellation period will apply from 14 days after the reciept of the t and cs through the post.

 

REgards

Peter

[joesoap]

Letter just received.

 

Wescott have passed account back to HFC Bank after CCA request so they can deal with it direct.

 

Anyone else had anything like this occur.

 

I am assuming thay cannot produce the agreement.

 

Wescot replied to me that they'd get back in due course. The debt was with MBNA and we are pretty sure MBNA don't have an agreement. Took advice off the lovely Cornucopia, sit back, relax and wait; forever possibly, who knows?

[Pliny the Penuriosus]

John Lewis's 12 + 30 are up on the 14 June.

 

I wont send them a non-compliance i will just complaint straight to OFT and TS. Like i said im not going to keep reminding them of thier obligations. The longer they fail to produce the agreement the better for me.

 

This is a quote from Laiste (who is very good, i hope she doesnt mind me using it) has changed my way of thinking:-

 

I think it is easy to fall into the trap of pursuing the recipient of the CCA request, and I can understand why it seems to be the logical thing to do. Also, given that there are a number of people on here giving advice which encourages sending the stop telephoning me letter, I am not at all surprised that people follow this advice. I think I am very much in the minority on here suggesting doing things differently. I will say though, I have helped a number of people (not on here) who have done what I advise and it has worked out very much to their

advantage!

 

Law is as much about tactics as it is about understanding the Common Law and legislation. It is unfortunate that some people dispensing advice are not doing it having considered the full implications for the debtor. Yes, calls from creditors and DCA's are a royal pain, but I think it is better to put up with calls from these morons for a period of time, rather than take the easy and IMO foolish option of sending a letter that may end up leaving you with no claim for damages, but still saddled with the debt! It's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned!

 

The other and far more important consideration which I forgot to include in Cristal's thread is this, if you start sending letters filled with legal jargon, and advising said company of their unlawful/illegal conduct, you will alert them to the fact that you are legally savvy, so they will be disinclined to take you to Court. Well what's wrong with that, some people reading this will say? Well, until a Court claim is issued, the matter will rumble on and on......preventing you from getting on with your life! It also means that if they a weak case, or screw it up for some reason, they can't come after you again, they only get the one shot! By lulling them into a false sense of security, so that they think you're a bit dim, because you haven't responded to any of their calls/letters, they believe you're running scared and that if they issue a claim, you'll be easy pickings and are unlikely to defend the claim! Once they do this, when you file your def and c/c, they are locked into the situation and either have to go to Court, which they won't want to do, given the harassment you've documented in your claim, or they will have to pay you compensation, as the hope is their case will be very weak! It has to be said, their position is very much weakened even if they have a good case, if you have compelling issues to raise, such as harassment! Given the respective bargaining power of the creditor and the debtor, the creditor has it all and the debtor has none; it is hardly going to sit well with the Court, if the creditor, who has all the power, is seen battering the debtor into submission by the most aggressive and unreasonable means. I don't think the Judge is going to accept that the creditor telephoned 10 times a day for a period of 5mnths because he really liked the debtor and just fancied a chat!

 

You would be surprised what will make a creditor run away, so if you have a detailed account of harassment, perhaps Data Protection Act 1998 breaches, given that your personal info has been distributed to everyone apart from the milkman, defamation and the icing on the cake, (hopefully)-no agreement, or a fatally flawed one, you can make them suffer big time! Oh and when you're finished taking their money off them, you can report them to the OFT and hopefully get them stripped of their credit licence or given a great big fine as the OFT's powers have been increased as of April this year! Banks, credit card companies and DCA's are bullies, but if they are up against a competent opponent, especially one who has a long detailed account of harassment, amongst other issues, he is not likely to want the matter to end up in front of a Judge!

 

Maybe worth thinking about

 

I understand perfectly where Laiste is coming from & such advice should be given very serious consideration & should be dependent, to a great measure, on whether you’re a defendant or claimant

However my experience is quite the opposite.

In the case of defendants when the opposition have come to realise that the consumer IS well versed in consumer law they have in most cases I have been involved with backed off never to be heard of again. The worst they have done is to sell the debt on but the new DCA on being told the circumstances often drops the matter after having been quoted the Harassment Act 1997. Also as the defendant it helps greatly if you can tell the court that you have reported the claimant for a breach of regulation

In the case of claimants it helps because the creditor doesn’t usually want to be exposed in court as not having complied with the regulation. It just adds a little zest to the banks need to settle

“You takes you pick then makes your choice”

[Peterbard]

Hi

Yes Barclays do this all the time then you realise the DCA they have assigned it to are actually not a sepperate organisation at all they are just playing for time stick to your orriginal time scale the are not to re asign any way whilst the agrement is in dispute.

Peter

[yaffsimone1]

I understand perfectly where Laiste is coming from & such advice should be given very serious consideration & should be dependent, to a great measure, on whether you’re a defendant or claimant

 

However my experience is quite the opposite.

 

In the case of defendants when the opposition have come to realise that the consumer IS well versed in consumer law they have in most cases I have been involved with backed off never to be heard of again. The worst they have done is to sell the debt on but the new DCA on being told the circumstances often drops the matter after having been quoted the Harassment Act 1997. Also as the defendant it helps greatly if you can tell the court that you have reported the claimant for a breach of regulation

 

In the case of claimants it helps because the creditor doesn’t usually want to be exposed in court as not having complied with the regulation. It just adds a little zest to the banks need to settle

 

“You takes you pick then makes your choice”

 

 

I have to admit i am torn which way to go To be honest looking through my correspondance with my creditors i seem to have adpoted a different tactic depending on the attitude of the creditor!

 

I can't see any harm in using both tactics.

[joneshousehold]

I prefer Pliny's approach. As long as you are being reasonable and you have good grounds to challenge the paperwork I would always want to look as if I had tried to point out the mistakes to the creditor giving them every opportunity to respond and action correctly. The fact that they have ploughed on regardless will put them in a bad light.

 

I have a lot of respect for Laiste who has had some notable successes with creditors but I do have misgivings about giving an inaccurate impression in order to force the creditors hand.

 

As always, it is the choice of the individual and as long as you prepare thoroughly your chances of success are increased.

[joneshousehold]

I've never heard so much crap in my life!

 

Two sections. One Civil, one Criminal, but we cannot proceed with any Criminal actions as we are under resourced.

 

Yes TS, you do proceed with criminal action when the other side is a small vulnerable business who won't kick up too much of a fuss, and haven't the legal backing of an opposition like the banks. You don't have to commit so many resources or risk losing your corner because your staff don't have anything like the amount of training and education the banks pump into their staff.

 

Peoples Friend? Under funded try hards.

 

Tide

 

I love your plain speaking Tide!

[veilside01702]

Hi all, Just a quickie....

Had letter from EGG and one from Moorcroft...Both demanding I pay Moorcroft for a credit card debt. Unfortunately for them it was paid off 3 years ago, as confirmed by egg today....

They have mixed up an old credit card with a loan...Egg committed criminal offence 13th May 2007 after the CCA request was ignored...

I have written on 21st May threatening legal action for harrassment, breaching data protection act and PPI misselling.....

Can anyone suggest a course of action as they are persuing a debt without supplying the CCA, T&C's and Statement of account....??

This after listing the loan they actually had a signed agreement for as settled with Experian and equifax...then listing three more loans I don't know anything about, even they can't find a record of them anywhere!

Yet this is what they are getting moorcroft to chase me for!

Need peterbard.....lol

Russ

[maybelline]

this is very similar to what HFC are doing to me! also re the Westcot comment, yes, they just wrote to say, please be patient while we investigate, this after several months and several letters, still no agreement, default notice, nothing!

 

I am trying to get them to remove the unsubstantiated default data but they seem to just keep sending the same old wrong info, I can see no way of convincing them they are wrong, so I too would love to know what next?

[davefirewalker]

Hi

 

I suppose that s10 and 13 of the dpa 1998 would do to start

 

10. - (1) Subject to subsection (2), an individual is entitled at any time by notice in writing to a data controller to require the data controller at the end of such period as is reasonable in the circumstances to cease, or not to begin, processing, or processing for a specified purpose or in a specified manner, any personal data in respect of which he is the data subject, on the ground that, for specified reasons-

 

(a) the processing of those data or their processing for that purpose or in that manner is causing or is likely to cause substantial damage or substantial distress to him or to another, and

(b) that damage or distress is or would be unwarranted.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply-

 

(a) in a case where any of the conditions in paragraphs 1 to 4 of Schedule 2 is met, or

(b) in such other cases as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State by order.

(3) The data controller must within twenty-one days of receiving a notice under subsection (1) ("the data subject notice") give the individual who gave it a written notice-

 

(a) stating that he has complied or intends to comply with the data subject notice, or

(b) stating his reasons for regarding the data subject notice as to any extent unjustified and the extent (if any) to which he has complied or intends to comply with it.

(4) If a court is satisfied, on the application of any person who has given a notice under subsection (1) which appears to the court to be justified (or to be justified to any extent), that the data controller in question has failed to comply with the notice, the court may order him to take such steps for complying with the notice (or for complying with it to that extent) as the court thinks fit.

 

(5) The failure by a data subject to exercise the right conferred by subsection (1) or section 11(1) does not affect any other right conferred on him by this Part.

 

 

 

13. - (1) An individual who suffers damage by reason of any contravention by a data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to compensation from the data controller for that damage.

 

(2) An individual who suffers distress by reason of any contravention by a data controller of any of the requirements of this Act is entitled to compensation from the data controller for that distress if-

 

(a) the individual also suffers damage by reason of the contravention, or

(b) the contravention relates to the processing of personal data for the special purposes.

(3) In proceedings brought against a person by virtue of this section it is a defence to prove that he had taken such care as in all the circumstances was reasonably required to comply with the requirement concerned.

 

 

Dave

[rippedoffagain]

Ok boys and girls. My bank have ignored my CCA request, save to send me a copy of application form, no prescribed terms.

 

Application form for your perusal.

 

This copyI have written to them three times advising them of there non compliance. There response received recently:-

 

 

 

In the same post:-

 

 

 

So, advice please.

 

A) Ignore and let them dig themselves deeper, as per Laiste's advice.

B) Report them to Trading Standards / OFT.

C) Write back and inform them of their error.

 

Ok I think C)

 

Dear Mr xxxxxxx

 

Re: − Account/Reference Number xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

I am in receipt of your letter dated xxxx May 2007, the contents of which have been noted. I notice that you write to me from Collections and Recovery Department.

 

I believe that a misunderstanding may have taken place between your department and Card Services. What Card Services have supplied in relation to my Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 78 request is a copy of an application form and a set of terms and conditions. I enclose a copy of the Application form for your perusal.

 

This copy does not comply with certain important provisions of the above Act.

 

1. Credit limit (or statement as to how it is to be determined / notified to me).

2. Interest Rate.

3. Rate and frequency of payments.

 

Bellow is an extract from The Act

 

61 Signing of agreement

(1) A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless—

(a) a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to regulations under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed manner both by the debtor or hirer and by or on behalf of the creditor or owner, and

(b) the document embodies all the terms of the agreement, other than implied terms, and

 

© the document is, when presented or sent to the debtor or hirer for signature, in such a state that all its terms are readily legible.

I would also draw your attention to The Office of Fair Trading draft Regulations

 

8.2 What if prescribed terms are missing or incorrect?

s127(3) provides that the court may not make an enforcement order unless a document containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor – see Q1.21.

If therefore any of the prescribed terms is missing, or incorrect, the agreement is not enforceable against the debtor, and the court is precluded from making an enforcement order.

 

8.3 What are the prescribed terms?

The prescribed terms specified in Sch 6 are as follows:

• amount of credit – see Q8.4

• credit limit – see Q8.5

• rate of interest – see Q8.6

• repayments – see Q8.9.

Sch 6 was not amended by the 2004 Regulations.

 

I must inform you that your company, since xxx April 2007 is in default of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 78, and on the xxxMay 2007 committed an offence under the said Act.

 

May I suggest you consult the relevant regulations if you are in any doubt of my assertion?

 

Comments welcome.

[veilside01702]

Hi all, can someone cast an eye over this letter and tell me if it sounds ok??

cheers....Russ

 

'FINAL NOTICE BEFORE ACTION!'

 

To Moorcroft Debt Recovery,

Thank you for your letters dated 14/05/2007 and 24/05/2007. As previously requested you have still as yet failed to supply a true and genuine copy of the alleged Consumer Credit Agreement, Terms and Conditions and Statement of Account as required. As of the 13th April 2007, It became impossible for you to enforce this alleged agreement until a copy was supplied to me. On 13th May 2007, I believe a Criminal Offense may have been committed and has therefore been passed to the relevant authorities.

I do not therefore recognise any agreement with Moorcroft Debt Recovery to repay monies for these reasons :-

 

1) I do not recognise any Consumer Credit Agreement taken out with Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd. or EGG PLC. for the amount you are demanding!

2) Neither EGG or Moorcroft have provided proof that this debt / loan even exists!

3) Moorcroft are trying to recover the alleged debt with no proof that it ever existed after EGG and Moorcroft have failed to comply with a Consumer Credit Agreement Request, as per The Consumer Credit Act 1974 sections 77-78 and all subsequent revisions. Therfore as EGG have possibly committed a Criminal offence on 13th May 2007, by failing to supply a copy of this agreement, including, terms and conditions and statement of account. Egg had the required 12 days to supply the agreement and did nothing. Then the further calender month,as per The Consumer Credit acts requirements and still no Agreement, statement and Terms and Conditions!

4) The debt Moorcroft are attempting to recover is listed as settled with Experian and Equifax by EGG PLC on 28thOctober 2003. I therefore believe the agreement to have been termi nated on this date. Please see previously supplied proof of settlement!

 

Thank you for your advice to contact the credit reference agencies, but unfortunately EGG processed the incorrect information, therefore as ‘The Data Controller’ they are responsible for any data incorrectly processed. Luckily for me though, I actually have a copy of the Data Protection act 1974 and it’s subsequent revisions. Can you please tell me what section you are referencing for this advice??

 

As for expecting me to make any kind of payment to EGG or Moorcroft (acting as EGG PLC’s Representatives), I will not be doing so, as neither of you have supplied any enforceable signed Credit Agreements as requested on 3 seperate occasions!

 

In actuality I require Moorcroft and EGG PLC to repay me all monies paid to them in respect of these unsubstansiated loans!

I have been badgered and harassed into making payments to you and EGG, with threats of legal action and your employees paying me a visit!

I have now found out that you have been taking money from me for non existant loan agreements. I require this money be paid back immediately!

 

I therefore give you 14 days to return ALL PAYMENTS MADE to EGG PLC and Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd.

 

As EGG and yourselves have so kindly provided confirmation that Moorcroft debt Recovery Ltd. are acting on behalf of EGG PLC. in recovering this unlawfull debt. I shall consider you jointly liable for all damages, distress and costs!

 

I am fully prepared to vigorously defend any legal action taken by either EGG PLC or Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd. After almost 4 years trying to address my concerns with EGG PLC and Moorcroft, I feel you have both caused me distress and acted in an unacceptable manner!

 

As previously stated:-

 

Please also be advised re your threats to send someone to collect goods or Monies from my home that:

 

There is an implied license under English Common Law for certain people to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.).

 

I revoke license under English Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so without our permission, you will then be liable to damages for a tort of trespass. You would also be conspiring in a trespass if you sent someone to visit me.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in writing!

 

Yours Sincerely