Cap1 & CCA return

[maybelline]

Sorry to intrude but has anyone caught the news?

 

Nationwide have just been fined nearly £1,000,000 for loseing a laptop.

 

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlebusiness.aspx?type=businessNews&storyID=2007-02-14T113214Z_01_WLB4955_RTRUKOC_0_UK-NATIONWIDE-LAPTOP-FINE.xml

 

yes, I had a letter from them on this, when it happened, you know, dont worry your details are safe?

[Peterbard]

Hi

regarding the issue of whether an agreement can be enforced if it is produced after the 44 day period (ie after the offence has been comitted.I recieved the following from the OFT today.

Dear Mr Bardsley

Thank you for your email dated 12 February 2007 concerning a creditor's ability to enforce an agreement where it has failed to comply with a request under Section 77 of the Act.

Unfortunately I have not had sight of the previous correspondence or information that you refer and as such am not aware of any particular circumstances which might be relevant. In general where a valid request has been made to a creditor under Section 77,78 of the Act and the creditor has failed, within the prescribed 12 day period, to supply the requisite information then the creditor is not able to take steps to enforce the debt with or without a court order. The commission of an offence, should the failure to supply the documents continue for a month, does not affect the long term enforceability of an agreement as far as the Act is concerned. Once the creditor does comply with the request, whether beyond the prescribed period or not, he will be able to enforce the agreement again.

I hope that this is helpful, but please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any further queries on this matter.

Yours sincerely

Henry Aitchison

Consumer Credit Enforcement

Markets and Projects (Services) Group

Office of Fair Trading

 

Just as it says in the act

 

Peter

 

Peter

[humbleman]

In general where a valid request has been made to a creditor under Section 77,78 of the Act and the creditor has failed, within the prescribed 12 day period, to supply the requisite information then the creditor is not able to take steps to enforce the debt with or without a court order. The commission of (They commit) an offence, should the failure to supply the documents continue for a month, does not affect the long term enforceability of an agreement as far as the Act is concerned. Once the creditor does comply with the request, whether beyond the prescribed period or not, he will be able to enforce the agreement again.

 

Peter

 

they might aswell say that the creditor cannot enforce an agreement without providing the same. I really dont know how the 12 days and 30 days make any difference. even if they commit an offence who's going to prosecute them.

[Peterbard]

Don't worry m55, I think that's the whole point! Peter likes to turn his posts into a riddle in the hope that we'll get so fed up with working them out that we'll just agree with him!

 

Missed this first time round

 

I think there is a basic lack of understanding about the mechanics of the cca and how regulations and SI,s are used to modify them here, when i get time i will do a Peter and Paul explination for you.

 

Peter

[Peterbard]

they might aswell say that the creditor cannot enforce an agreement without providing the same. I really dont know how the 12 days and 30 days make any difference. even if they commit an offence who's going to prosecute them.

 

Hi

 

Well exactly but the contention was that they could not enforceonce the offence was commited without leave of the court to do so.

This is of course incorrect. The offence would be a criminal matter and would have to be pursued throught the criminal courts by the Crown Prosecusion Service and would have no effect on the enforce ment of the agreement.

 

Peter

[InKogneeToh]

hI

Hi you Have got to be joking how clear can i make it.

 

THE INFOMATION REGULATIONS ON A DISTANCE CONTRACTARE NOT THE SAME AS A NON DISTANCE CONTRACT THEY ARE INSTEAD TAKEN FROM THEDISTANCE MARKETING REGULATIONS.

 

Tell me exacly which words you can't understand and i will clarify further

 

Peter

 

Hi Peter

 

I was only teasing you!

 

Yes I do agree (get that? - AGREE! ) with you that the distance marketing regulations apply to credit card contracts concluded at a distance.

 

BUT - (can't capitulate totally, now can I? ) - these only apply to credit card agreements entered into after 31/05/05 and many of us have cards older than this, plus it relates to pre-contract information only.

 

I have no idea what (if any) information was required prior to a credit card agreement before these regs. applied.

 

Also much of the information is not relevant to a credit card agreement as the regs. cover contracts of all kinds. It also doesn't change the requirements for amount of credit, repayment rates, cancellation info. to be included in the credit agreement. It's not an 'or' situation, it's an 'and' situation.

 

Regards, Pam

[Smoothy]

 

. The commission of an offence, should the failure to supply the documents continue for a month, does not affect the long term enforceability of an agreement as far as the Act is concerned. Once the creditor does comply with the request, whether beyond the prescribed period or not, he will be able to enforce the agreement again.

 

Peter

 

Well, I just re-read CCA 1974....

 

(4) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

 

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

 

(b) if the default continues for one month he commits an offence.

 

As has been said before once an offence has been commited, it does not go away. In which case, although the default is removed, I can see how they may continue to request payment but in order to enforce the agreement, by going to court, they leave themselves open to investigation regarding the offence. Thats how i see it.......although i reserve the right to withdraw this statement if it is found to be untrue!!!

[InKogneeToh]

Don't worry m55, I think that's the whole point! Peter likes to turn his posts into a riddle in the hope that we'll get so fed up with working them out that we'll just agree with him!

 

Missed this first time round

 

I think there is a basic lack of understanding about the mechanics of the cca and how regulations and SI,s are used to modify them here, when i get time i will do a Peter and Paul explination for you.

 

Peter

 

So who's this Paul fellow then? I hope his spelling is better than yours!

[InKogneeToh]

they might aswell say that the creditor cannot enforce an agreement without providing the same. I really dont know how the 12 days and 30 days make any difference. even if they commit an offence who's going to prosecute them.

 

Exactly!!

 

My student son was illegally evicted from a private let at the end of December as he had got behind with his rent (unknown to me).

 

Just a couple of previous shirty letters and then he gets back on 2nd Jan after spending new year with us to find door locks changed and a note saying if he wanted any of his things he would have to phone the house manager.

 

Illegal eviction (i.e. without proper notice and a court order) is a criminal offence but when we reported this to the relevant city council (who are responsible for such matters) they just 'shrugged their shoulders' and said ah well, if you'd paid your rent on time this wouldn't have happened!

 

So what's the point of making anything a criminal offence if no-one's bothered to act on it??

 

Regards, Pam

[m55dlc]

I think the difference here is that landlords are expected to be shirty, and financial institutions in these matters are supposed to be whiter than white. If these companies act in such an illegal manner, they can lose their licenses and their businesses. This is a fickle world we live in here and it would only take one judgement to effectively close these guys down. These are the stakes we are dealing with here, and the MIBs know this. If a landlord says he sent a letter to your son, it's one word against another, if three hundred, five thousand, a million people say the same, how can they argue against that?

 

How many credit card companies are there out there and how many credit cards. If you think about the power they have wielded over us for the last thirty years with breaking this rule, misinterpreting that one, trying to take money from us in unscrupulous (and sometimes illegal) ways when we are least able to do so. We are talking about weight here, the views of the many cannot be so easy sidelined as the views of the one.

[Peterbard]

It's not an 'or' situation, it's an 'and' situation.

 

Do i have to copy the OFT FAQ again the Information regs do not apply,

they are replaced by the Distance selling regs. Yes some of the regs are the same but the point is that some of the regs in the orriginal are not in the latter so it is not an addition.

 

Peter

[InKogneeToh]

It's not an 'or' situation, it's an 'and' situation.

 

Do i have to copy the OFT FAQ again the Information regs do not apply,

they are replaced by the Distance selling regs. Yes some of the regs are the same but the point is that some of the regs in the orriginal are not in the latter so it is not an addition.

 

Peter

 

I wasn't saying it's new info. regs. AND old info. regs. I was saying it's new info. regs. AND agreement regs.

 

It seems to me that the credit card companies have been issuing all this pre-contact info. in their nice shiny T&C leaflets but have also been putting the prescribed terms in there as well, whereas those terms must still be in the signature document.

 

But hey! I suppose they think - 'well we never get any repercussions when we commit a criminal offence so we're sure to come up smelling of roses if any of those insignificant consumers cotton on and start causing trouble over our 'agreements'!

 

Regards, Pam

[angry cat]

Thanks Guys for the link to CCA 1974:)

 

Pam, I think that you've hit the nail right on the head with your following quote

 

[quote=

 

But hey! I suppose they think - 'well we never get any repercussions when we commit a criminal offence so we're sure to come up smelling of roses if any of those insignificant consumers cotton on and start causing trouble over our 'agreements'!

 

Regards, Pam

 

In my humble opinion, I think that they probably will come up smelling of roses...it is unlikely that the OFT will prosecute-

Who are they going to prosecute, the controlling mind?

Who would be the person sent to jail and even if they were fined £2,500, that amount is just peanuts to any bank.

 

Interesting isn't it, if it was a member of the public that has committed a criminal offence, that person would be carted off by the rozzers...A Criminal Offence is an Offence against the Crown, (The Queen) how come that the banks can get away with an offence against HRH Queen Elizabeth II

 

Somethings wrong somewhere...I'm not so sure about the smell of sweet Roses, it stinks of something else that just came out of my dogs bottom.

 

Love AC

 

AC

[joneshousehold]

Can a cat, angry or otherwise, have a pet dog?

 

Sorry folks - I'll get my coat!

[ladybird17]

Jones Household - I think you are very cruel wanting to can a cat. This could breach RSPCA regulations.

[FANTASY CHARGES]

IS there going to be a bi-election in the near future ?

 

anybody thought of forming the "Consumer Action Group" party

 

come on terminator i am sure you would stand to get us some good exposure ! think about the effect of your manifesto once joe public "was enlightened"ix

[un1boy]

Thanks Guys for the link to CCA 1974:)

 

Pam, I think that you've hit the nail right on the head with your following quote

 

 

 

In my humble opinion, I think that they probably will come up smelling of roses...it is unlikely that the OFT will prosecute-

Who are they going to prosecute, the controlling mind?

Who would be the person sent to jail and even if they were fined £2,500, that amount is just peanuts to any bank.

 

Interesting isn't it, if it was a member of the public that has committed a criminal offence, that person would be carted off by the rozzers...A Criminal Offence is an Offence against the Crown, (The Queen) how come that the banks can get away with an offence against HRH Queen Elizabeth II

 

Somethings wrong somewhere...I'm not so sure about the smell of sweet Roses, it stinks of something else that just came out of my dogs bottom.

 

Love AC

 

AC

 

 

Why not write to lizzy then?

[m55dlc]

I personally tend to think that people are not inclined to vote for a 6'2" cyborg with a penchant for timetravel to be a good member of parliament, but hey, the Californians voted for him, so it must be OK

[paulwlton]

If a creditor mistates a prescribed term in an agreement, the court, since Wilson deems the agreement unenforceable.

 

In Wilson the document fee was included in the credit this seems to me that a document fee should not incur interest as the fee is the first payment to be made.

 

My question is if interest is charged on the document fee and is included in the prescribed term, the interest thenwould this indeed fall fowell of Wilson?.

[InKogneeToh]

If a creditor mistates a prescribed term in an agreement, the court, since Wilson deems the agreement unenforceable.

 

In Wilson the document fee was included in the credit this seems to me that a document fee should not incur interest as the fee is the first payment to be made.

 

My question is if interest is charged on the document fee and is included in the prescribed term, the interest thenwould this indeed fall fowell of Wilson?.

 

Hi

 

In my opinion it would be wrong to charge interest on the document fee. Have you read the whole of Wilson v FCT and v Secretary of Trade and Industry because it may refer to this 'interest charge on fees' issue. The HL judgment is very long but full of good info. I just can't remember if it mentions this aspect.

 

Regards, Pam

[FANTASY CHARGES]

Hi

 

In my opinion it would be wrong to charge interest on the document fee. Have you read the whole of Wilson v FCT and v Secretary of Trade and Industry because it may refer to this 'interest charge on fees' issue. The HL judgment is very long but full of good info. I just can't remember if it mentions this aspect.

 

Regards, Pam

REMEMBER the period when some credit cards charged "annual fees" was it upto 8 years ago (guess). does my interpretation that they should not have charged interest on this annual fee hold any water or am i using a "sieve argument"

[paulwlton]

Hi

 

In my opinion it would be wrong to charge interest on the document fee. Have you read the whole of Wilson v FCT and v Secretary of Trade and Industry because it may refer to this 'interest charge on fees' issue. The HL judgment is very long but full of good info. I just can't remember if it mentions this aspect.

 

Regards, Pam

 

It doesn't specifically state interest should'nt be charged on Fees, it relates to incorrect prescribed terms. In my opinion if interest has been charged on the fee then the interest has been incorectly stated.

[zubo]

I did read Wilson a while back but a lot of it went ....over my head...

could someone, in respect of document fees explain what/why these are. I cannot recall paying these and is there any relevence specifically to Credit Cards?

 

Would this not be more HP or loan related?

 

ta v much

[InKogneeToh]

Interesting isn't it, if it was a member of the public that has committed a criminal offence, that person would be carted off by the rozzers...A Criminal Offence is an Offence against the Crown, (The Queen) how come that the banks can get away with an offence against HRH Queen Elizabeth II

 

Hi

 

Well apparently not in some cases! The landlord who committed a criminal offence by illegally evicting my son is an ordinary member of the public. I phoned the police (because according to advice from Shelter, that is what you should do) but they weren't interested at all!

 

Perhaps these sorts of offences don't gain them so many brownie points on their performance records as might perhaps following motorists around at night to see if they can spot a broken light or slightly less than A1 tyre! Or taking sneaky photos of drivers who have slipped slightly over the 30 mph limit! They have to use their resources effectively after all!

 

Regards, Pam

[ladybird17]

Morning all, - could we please discuss this.....!

 

HSBC Say they dont have to Keep CCA more than SIX YEARS