Cap1 & CCA return

[diddydicky]

Oh bugger......think thats the point I fell down on, having to repay 'em

 

Evening DD and all

 

Can any of you lot help Spookey out with an up and coming defence needed?

 

Agreement looks sound but theres a big chunk of PPI and charges if you have any ideas .....

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/223857-advice-required-plz-court.html

 

evening- sorry i'm not your man for figures- they give me a headache!

 

someone will be along i'm sure

[Smarterchick]

evening- sorry i'm not your man for figures- they give me a headache!

 

..and that's half the trouble, our kids get a headache with figures because they are not taught how to deal with money and the evil 'credit'..(not saying you are a kid DD) but all alisindebt is demonstrating is that using credit is like driving a car - you have to be trained and skilled at it not to fall victim to it and crash. Even the most experienced and astute get caught, it takes no prisoners - it's a killer.

 

I suggest, as we are on the Agreements thread, we all go away and remind everyone, children, friends, neighbours to make use of the time given when taking out credit to get the agreement analysed and checked and also take advice to see if there might be better alternatives to what they might be considering. This has to start somewhere...make it start with YOU.

 

One of the leading DCA's I know has a woman in senior management who gives her time to local schools to go and teach kids about credit and encourage the use of Credit Unions which is little known about in the community. It helps people locally with small amounts of credit when they need it - bit like the provident lady without the 175% interest .

 

Go teach someone - we all can tell someone something of our experiences and maybe, just maybe we'll save one or two souls as a result.

 

SC

[car2403]

bit like the provident lady without the 175% interest .

 

Have to be careful with that one, though, as Provident lend to a very specific sector of our community - normally those that don't want mainstream credit, can't get it, and don't know/understand/care about the level of interest being repaid. The ultimate in relationship lending - my mother doesn't lend from Provident, she lends from Jackie up the street who comes and collects each week and has a coffee and shares my mother's problems with her. Fair play.

 

Actually, I have one of these and due to my circumstances I've only been paying £5 a month on a £1,000 balance. While it's not reported on my credit file, and I don't miss that £5 a month, there's no incentive to clear the debt, so the interest means nothing to me. At the time, I couldn't have survived without that loan. A means to an end.

 

The issue is that there are other less scrupulous companies out there that charge this amount of interest, apply a high level of fees, and pursue, pursue, pursue the debtor like hounds. They are the ones to avoid - legalised loan sharks... (No names, here, 'Guv...)

[MilkTrayMan]

I have to disagree with you about the friendly/helpfulness approach of Provident car2403...

An ex of mine was a 'Jackie', who made her living from the hefty commission that she earnt by encouraging those least able to take out consolidation loan after consolidation loan around the more seedier parts of Nottingham.

I could tell U a tale or two about their training methods for 'Jackie's' + also the pressure that they are put under to obtain their targets.

For a start, they are engaged by Provident on a self-employed basis, which should set alarm bells ringing if nothing else.

Admittedly they are the more softer face of modern day bonded slavery

...But **** nonetheless, for the sinister + snidey methods that they use to continually entrap peeps into a cycle of debt, by their manipulation of the knowledge of the peeps personal circumstances once they have 'befriended' them to keep them hooked.

[MilkTrayMan]

An example of the extortional rates that Provident charge the naive + unsuspecting...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/117164-providents-latest-offer.html

 

 

[Rooster-UK]

An example of the extortional rates that Provident charge the naive + unsuspecting...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/117164-providents-latest-offer.html

 

 

 

Hmmmmm!

The thread linked to was started on 15th October 2007, 15:54

The last post in that thread was dated 16th October 2007, 16:23

 

Believe it or not, they have produced some newer offers during the last two years!

[johnerog]

Hello all.

I need some help with a court appearance on 28th Oct.

Please check out Cap (one) Justice.

Sorry to intrude.

[enoughisenough]

Can you post some more details John?

 

Ta.

[the main man]

Here's a link to johnerog's thread....

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/216495-capital-one-justice.html

[johnerog]

Thanks MM. All help apreciated

[captain2]

Hi maybe i should have started a new thread with this but this is probably an appropriate place to its an example of a letter i've sent to a few of my cards just lately under the 'banking code ' -

 

Here it is -

 

 

Capital One,

PO Box 5283,

Nottingham

NG2 3YG

 

datexxxxxxxx

 

Dear Sirs,

 

RE COMPLAINT under administration of the banking code – account number

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

I have been advised by the Code’s web site that you follow a complaints procedure when the banking code may have been breached. Please advise me as to that procedure and consider this letter a complaint under that procedure.

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxsentence deleted

 

As you will know the code outlines the following issues –

 

Under the Banking Code which applies to Credit Card companies there is a fairness commitment and to provide clear information on products, how they work, terms and commitments – detailed information before you commit to a contract – The code specifically states - 4.3 ‘we will give you a full explanation of how we work out interest.’ The Banking Code also reiterates your commitment Under the Data Protection Act of my right to see the records you hold about me which includes copy signed agreements. Furthermore under the banking code you may only contact credit reference agencies if the account is not in dispute. Section 13.6.

 

As you have failed to provide a true copy of the executed agreement other than a single sided photocopy claiming long term interest rate of 11.9 % (which it has not been for some time) showing prescribed terms and no other terms and conditions I believe the account to be legitimately in dispute.

 

That you have placed this account in the hands of a DCA and defaulted it means you have broken your own code. Your DCA has threatened legal action and referring the matter to solicitors. This is completely unacceptable and illegal. I note the following for your attention –

 

Sections 77 and 78 of the CCA 1974 refer to supplying a copy of the ‘executed’ agreement within 12 working days of receiving a written request from the debtor. Failure to do so makes the agreement unenforceable against the debtor until a copy is provided.

 

Execution involves signing the agreement. If no agreement has been executed, it is impossible to supply a true copy of the agreement. Should a creditor supply a copy agreement, even though the debtor has never signed any agreement with that creditor, no indication should be given that it is a true copy or a copy of an executed agreement.

 

To do so may contravene Regulation 5 of the CPRs and be an unfair or improper business practice.

 

The consequence of the debtor not having signed a credit agreement with the creditor is that the agreement is unenforceable except where the court orders that enforcement may take place. Where the agreement was made before 6th April 2007 the court is not able to make such an order unless the agreement was signed by the debtor.

 

Therefore it is misleading to state, when complying with a section 77 or 78 request, that the debtor has signed or would have signed (or similar) the enclosed agreement where the debtor has not done so. From 26 May 2008 such a statement will be a breach of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs). Regulation 5 of the CPRs states that a commercial practice is a misleading action if it contains false information in relation to the main characteristics of the product (amongst other matters) and is likely therefore to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise. The product in question is the credit agreement and the main characteristics include the ‘execution of the product’ (Regulation 5(5)(d) of the CPRs).

 

Telling a consumer that he signed such an agreement is also a misleading statement about his rights and the risks he might face as covered by Regulation 5(4)(k) of the CPRs. It is our view that it is likely that a consumer will take a transactional decision to make a payment under the credit agreement or to refrain from exercising his rights under the agreement as a result of being misled about whether he signed it.

 

Breach of Regulation 5 of the CPRs is a criminal offence under Regulation 9 and can also be enforced under Part 8 of the Enterprise Act 2002. Under section 218A of the Enterprise Act, where an application for an Enforcement Order is made the court may require the Respondent ‘to provide evidence of the accuracy of any factual claim’ (such as a claim that a debtor has signed a credit agreement).

 

In addition, it should be noted that threats to take action that cannot be taken is listed as one of the factors that will be considered in assessing aggressive practices in Regulation 7(2) of the CPRs.

 

Please read the above information and consider the position.

 

In providing me a copy of what I have signed I cannot agree that any debt exists namely due to the none specification of interest rate and in my opinion I have already paid you considerably more than the original margin advertised and as the rate alteration is not stated in the agreement it has prevented me from finding such terms out and thus assessing the situation.

 

Regarding the interest charged - the following is an extract from the Office of Fair Trading web site -

 

One of the main themes of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is that there should be

‘truth in lending’, particularly in advertisements for credit and written agreements or

other documentation. The Total Charge for Credit Regulations, made under section 20 of the Act, define a total charge for credit (TCC) which includes interest and other charges which affect the real cost of borrowing – even if they are not payable under the credit agreement itself. Simply knowing the amount of the credit charges is not usually enough for a borrower to compare one credit deal with another. The time at which the credit and charges have to be repaid affects the rate of the charges being made and how valuable or costly the deal is to the borrower. Lenders use a number of different ways of charging interest and these can treat the time of payment in different ways. So, in addition to leaving out other charges, lenders’ interest rates will not generally provide a useful comparison. The Total Charge for Credit Regulations also set down how to calculate an annual percentage rate of charge

(APR), which expresses the TCC as a standard measure borrowers can use to compare the credit charges under one deal with another, whatever rate or method of charging is used. It is important to understand that APR is not the only thing the borrower needs to consider when choosing credit. For example, the deal with a lower APR might require monthly payments the borrower cannot afford, or run for much longer than the borrower wants or than the goods bought with the credit are likely to last, or the goods might be cheaper from another store, making that a better deal even though the credit charges are higher. However, APR is the only standard measure which allows the borrower to compare the charges being made for the credit provided. In addition to helping borrowers shop around for credit, the TCC and

 

APR have other uses under the Act. The TCC is used in the calculation of rebates on early settlement (details of these provisions are given in the Office’s booklet Matters

arising during the lifetime of an agreement) and to determine the charges which a

credit broker cannot make, or must return, if he does not obtain a loan for a

Office of……etc etc’

 

Thus section 20 of the CCA1974 defines TCC and this includes APR as a stated requirement and one of the prescribed terms of the Act where a court has no power to enforce if not stated correctly.

 

In your case the interest of 11.9% APR is stated and represented as being long term. Other terms are not stated and the payment details are omitted. The amount of credit and credit limit are also omitted. Thus the single sided ‘copy’ ‘agreement’ cannot be considered adequate under the Act as the prescribed terms are missing.

 

That there is no properly executed agreement contradicts your claim that you are reporting factual information regarding none payment and defaults as there is no proper basis for so doing furthermore under the banking code defaults are not allowed while an account is in dispute. Nor is not allowed under the Data Protection Act and is something I will write to the Commissioner of Information concerning wrongful dissemination of such information.

 

Under the Banking Code which applies to Credit Card companies there is a fairness commitment and to provide clear information on products, how they work, terms and commitments – detailed information before you commit to a contract – The code specifically states - 4.3 ‘we will give you a full explanation of how we work out interest.’ The Banking Code also reiterates your commitment Under the Data Protection Act of my right to see the records you hold about me which includes copy signed agreements. Furthermore under the banking code you may only contact credit reference agencies if the account is not in dispute. Section 13.6.

 

 

Due to the seriousness of this matter and any legal action, which may arise, I will only correspond in writing and will not accept phone calls or personal visits. Should you either visit or phone I shall consider this as harassment and either take legal action and/or make complaints to the Office of Fair Trading under section 40 of 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 from the other as a debt due under contract, he or she harasses the other with demands for payment which by their frequency, or the manner or the 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.'

 

 

Please take particular note of the above as I find your company tactics unreasonable harassment.

 

You are clearly in breach of the Banking Code your consumer Credit Licence and S.40 of the Administration of Justice Act.

 

Please note undertake your duty seriously to look at my complaint and answer my letters.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[swt61]

Thank you, indeed for this. I used to think that I had to own a home-in fact, most of the world rent-even in Asia.

 

I had my first mortgage when I was 24 years of age and it was like, I had "become of age". Even then, I can remember thinking at the back of my mind, "my God, this is a 25 year liability, I have to pay nearly double the asking price when I pay interest over 25 years, if I fail to pay, the can reposes, this is like renting, but with additional liabilities."

 

Many people enjoyed aspiring property values, remortgaged to "release the value locked in their homes", only to fall into negative equity, both in the mid nineties and recently.

 

I used to believe that I was a second class citizen when I sold up as I could no longer afford the mortgage and debts. In France, Italy and indeed, much of Asia, where now live, renting is the norm, to rent, but try tellling that to most people in the UK.

 

This is the point that I was trying to get across, the banking and credit system in the UK has manipulated our population to believe that you have to own a house, you have to have credit. Mix that in with their lies, deception and unlawful behaviour and that is why so many of us have come here.

 

They get you into debt, record bad records about you on the CRAs.

 

I was simply saying that I have been through all of this twice. In the mid nineties, I fell in debt because of investing in a rising property market that crashed, my two business partners ran way, and I ended up 35 thousand pounds in debt, even in those days!

 

Call me an expert if you want, but I wrote off those debts, the same as the more recent ones, that I have extensively reported here. actually, i just learnt as I went along, same as I did here, and the same as I report back here to help others.

 

It isn't over yet, i am fighting the 4 banks that I won against recently, as they still continue to log adverse credit ratings against me with eh CRAs.

 

This very week, i have sent warning letters to them and Experian, and tomorrow, MPs, OFT, TS amongst others.

 

This is the same determination that you see in me when you look over my other threads here, explaining to newcomers, the sorts of action that you can take. I have not been "lucky'. I have spent untold hours looking through these threads, working out how to win, and that bis what this site is about and that is what I believe in, nurture, encourage and I ask all who read this to take the same attitude. You CAN win against all odds.

 

I was so thankful to CAG, when I wrote off my debts, I paid a donation to CAG and also took a personal vow that I would continue to fight against unlawful CRA entries, despite that fact that i live abroad and want no more credit in the UK or elsewhere for that matter.

 

My story is publisihed widely on here to help those who are suffering like I suffered for many years.

 

Truly, credit free, in my opinion, is best. But that is my opinion, and like you say at the Site Team, that was the way our grandparents lived.

 

Only time will tell who is right and who is wrong.

 

No offence meant to anyone, I am simply telling you what happened to me, how I could have easily gone bust, but refused to give in. I truly hope that this is an inspiration to the many who read this.

 

As to getting my CRA file cleared, watch this space!

 

WOW what a Quote,

 

I am subbing to this out of deep interest to my troubles

 

Simon

[paulwlton]

Confused in relation to the APR.

 

Schedule 6 (prescribed terms) provides that: A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement.

 

Schedule 1 para 9 provides that: The rate of interest on the credit to be

provided under the agreement or, where more than one such rate applies, all the rates in all cases quoted on a per annum basis with details of

when each rate applies.

 

And schedule 1 para 15: The APR in relation to the agreement or a statement indicating that the total amount payable under the agreement is not greater than the total cash price of the goods, services, land or other things the acquisition of which is to be financed by credit under the agreement.

 

I've been informed that an out of tolerance APR is only a breach of schedule 1

 

In certain circumstances Could mis-stating the interest rate be fatal in respect of sec 65 127(3)

 

Regards

[captain2]

hi thanks - that sounds detailed and informative - if APR not stated for purchases but is for cash advances what do you think is the case there ?

[yamdemstig]

Hi,

 

I have sent requests for three agreements I have and had one back from Capital One and I'm a little confused. The agreement itself is on the back of the letter they sent in reply but has not been signed by myself or the company, the application for the card was done online though??? In the letter it states....... Thank you for your recent letter requesting copy documents for your account.

 

You requested copies of the executed agreement and a statement of your account under section 78 of the consumer credit act 1974.

 

Please find a copy of your agreement enclosed as requested. In accordance with section 78 of the CCA 1974 and CC regulations 1983, this is your original agreement, and if any terms have been varied, then the copied agreement will include the updated terms. In addition, your personal details, the signature box, signature and date of signature have been omitted from the copy provided as permitted under regulation 3 of the Consumer Credit regulations.

 

 

Is this just an attempt from Cap one to put me off the scent? what should I do next, please help someone???

[haggis1984]

McSubbing

[lexis200]

It's standard bollards I'm afraid. When I had this they ignored all letters, merely stating they had complied. They did stump up a (decidedly iffy) document under a SAR though, so maybe that'll work for you?

 

Unfortunately they are unbelievably arrogant as a company and don't really feel they need to abide by rules/laws, so you'll have to put your annoyances at them being completely obstructive on the back burner and work out other ways of getting what you want.

[captain2]

It's standard bollards I'm afraid. When I had this they ignored all letters, merely stating they had complied. They did stump up a (decidedly iffy) document under a SAR though, so maybe that'll work for you?

 

Unfortunately they are unbelievably arrogant as a company and don't really feel they need to abide by rules/laws, so you'll have to put your annoyances at them being completely obstructive on the back burner and work out other ways of getting what you want.

 

Hi yes I agree they are unbelievably arrogant - after having promised long term interest rate of 11.9 apr in '99 in their copy 'application form'. They have almost doubled that rate since and i reckon I have paid the balance now owed of some £6500 in excess interest over just 6 years !

 

In spite of not getting an explanation of their rates and how they can put them up and an agreement containing some terms (which could not possibly be enforceable) they then referred the account to Frederickson's who postured and threatened and who now have been instructed to close their file by Cap One. Then a letter from Cap One saying they were going to carry on enforcing the debt and they would strongly defend any court action I may bring !!!

 

Not sure yet what to make of this !

[lexis200]

Yep, they've just doubled OH's interest rate with no explanation apart from it being because of the current interest rates!!! Well, I can understand that, seeing as they're at their lowest rate for many years. Gits.

 

In addition to that, when he phoned to complain, they outright lied to him (we have that on tape), and when he was passed to the manager he was told firstly that they could not do anything, and secondly told he might want to think about getting another card from someone else and closing the account!!! He was basically told 'we've fleeced you as much as we can, and now that you're kicking up about it we'd like you to sod off'.

 

Obviously I'm now going to CCA them, get back any and all charges and generally irritate them as much as I can:)

[enoughisenough]

Hi All

 

It's generally recognised that C1 have flown a kite for years and pretty much got away with it. Until now that is.

 

There is currently a mass flooding of the FOS with complaints about Crapital One. You can take my word it goes well beyond this community. For the meantime here is the thread.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/226293-capital-one-group-fos.html

[lexis200]

I hope that's true eie, but how many other creditors have had mass complaints and yet are still going strong?

 

I suspect the sad truth is that we all chuck our complaints to the FOS, and they make a bit of a show at (possibly) fining Cap1 a few hundred thou., then they carry on as normal. I hope I'm wrong though, I'd be nice to see the little guys win on a large scale for a change.

[johnerog]

Sorry to butt in but i need urgent advice on thread. Capital (One) Justice.

 

Court tomorrow, Cap one have e-mailed admitting they have no signed agreement.

[lexis200]

Link to johnerog's thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/216495-capital-one-justice.html

[enoughisenough]

Hi Lexis

 

Agreed that you may well be right, they are endlessly inventive at dredging up new consumers and dreaming up yet more ways of screwing people out of their hard earned. What I think is interesting though is just how much this turning people over has sparked a consumer revolt. I see very little future for the credit card industry, at least in the short term. Things are likely to get very tough out there. I notice also that the EU Consumer Affairs commissioner is taking an active interest in UK banks and financial services.

[alisindebt]

Sorry to butt in but i need urgent advice on thread. Capital (One) Justice.

 

Court tomorrow, Cap one have e-mailed admitting they have no signed agreement.

 

When Lowell's could not give me a CCA because records were not that far back, I wrote to them saying that the account was not enforcabble and they wrote back and closed the account.

 

I suspect that Capital One will probably not turn up tomorrow, so I would play along the lines of no CCA no enforcement.

 

I am no lawyer, so not sure of the wording to use, but take a look through the template letters and threads discussing CCAs.

 

I know is at the eleventh hour, so perhaps you could use the advanced search facility using phrases like no "CCA."

 

I used a template letter that included the phrase:

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THIS DEBT AND THEREFORE REQUIRE YOU TO SUBSTANTIATE THIS BY PROVIDING THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTATION BEFORE I CORRESPOND FURTHER :

 

True copy of original signed executed credit agreement

 

 

As you are aware, a credit agreement that is not properly documented and signed by the customer is totally unenforceable under the CCA and therefore is a complete defence to any court claim that is issued.

 

Take note at this stage, that any legal action you may contemplate will be both vigorously defended and contested.

 

I am not suggesting you use these exact words but you could amend them for your defence.

 

Good luck!