Cap1 & CCA return

[Peterbard]

HI

I think we should take some affirative action about the discraceful none action of the OFT.

What i am suggesting is a letter of complaint to the DTI with a few examples on board.

I would like this to be a joint effort so what i have done is produce a rough draft document and invite modifications and especially cases that comply in the form of X verses y defaulted such adate reprted to OFT sucha date no action taken .

just copy the document and post any recomendations to changes in tthe form of the letter and esecially your experiances with the OFT I would hope to get this in the post by the end of the week preferably sooner

 

Best regards

and here it is Peter

 

 

Date

 

Ian McCarty DTI

 

Ref: refusal or inability for the OFT to enforce defaults and offences of the consumer credit act 1974.

 

Dear Sirs

 

We write to you in a matter of great concern regarding the above.

Currently there are a number of creditors that blatantly disregard the requests made by members of the public to provide information as regulated by section180 of the act.

We have a number of records of cases where creditors have failed to comply with the copy of documents regulations in particular sections 77-78 and are currently in the position where they are not only in default by none compliance but have committed an offence.

The designated procedure in these cases is to report the offence to the OFT for investigation and subsequent prosecution if required.

We find however that the response we receive from the OFT is that they cannot afford to pursue the action.

The result of this is that the creditor continues unlawfully to pursue the debt.

A brief example of the cases currently in this position detailed below

Example

• 12 May 2007: Request received by capital one for copy documents undet section 77.
  
• 26th May 2007:No response after first statutory period 12 working days they are now in default.
  
• 26th May2007 Offence reported to OFT 25th May Case Number ********
  
• Creditor continues unlawful pursuance of debt.
  
• 26th June 2007:Stil no response From Capital with correct documentation.
  
• 27th june the creditor have now committed an offence this is reported again to the OFT.
  
• No action taken by OFT due to shortage of recources.
  
• Creditor continues to unlawfully pursue agreement irrespetive of the legisation.

Obviously your details will be different you may not have a case nimbler or you may not have reported until after the full 42 days just adapt where necessary.

You can PM me and i will add the details to the letter or Copy and paste this posting back on the thread with your details on it and I will combine it with the others, (with the posters permission) before i send the completed letter. I will post it in full in case the are any alteration people want to make.

If there are any details you want to send but do not want posting let me know and i will leave them off the final posting but include them in the letter.

I do not want anyone to take offence at me doing this off the cuff but we need to do something.

 

Best regards

Peter

[Peterbard]

LOL

 

 

And what, exactly, do they think that is supposed to be

 

IMHO, bu**er all chance of a court enforcing that one

 

Hi

I think this is a true executed copy of a newspaper that has been out in the rain for few days.

Send them the usual faiure to comply clock is ticking don't dare put anythngon my credit record or i will have you letter.

Report them to the oFT and then fill in the letter above so we can add it to the list of complints to the dti.

 

Best regards

Peter

[minky93]

HI

I think we should take some affirative action about the discraceful none action of the OFT.

What i am suggesting is a letter of complaint to the DTI with a few examples on board.

I would like this to be a joint effort so what i have done is produce a rough draft document and invite modifications and especially cases that comply in the form of X verses y defaulted such adate reprted to OFT sucha date no action taken .

just copy the document and post any recomendations to changes in tthe form of the letter and esecially your experiances with the OFT I would hope to get this in the post by the end of the week preferably sooner

 

I have been following this thread with great interest and I think what Peter is suggesting is the way to go....

 

singarly they can ignore but collectively stands a better chance of someone actually dealing with this matter as it won't be as easy to ignore/hide.

 

I can't offer anything as yet as I only sent my CCA request off 30th May.

 

 

minky xx

[ncf355]

Also well up for PB's suggestion

[elizabeth1]

Hi

I think this is a true executed copy of a newspaper that has been out in the rain for few days.

Send them the usual faiure to comply clock is ticking don't dare put anythngon my credit record or i will have you letter.

Report them to the oFT and then fill in the letter above so we can add it to the list of complints to the dti.

 

Best regards

Peter

 

Peter this letter is a good idea!!

 

It never ceases to amaze me how these companies keep coming up with these "mushed up versions" of executed copies. We have seen so many on here?

 

We really need to make a stand and try stop these companies reporting this lousy data to the CRA's - as the CRA's never listen to us about what they are writing is wrong etc.. - for some weird reasoning they always side with the Lenders who are clearly just writing for fun? They clearly can't have any proof that what they are writing or allow to be written is right?

 

There are so many of us struggling to stop these CRA's writing rubbish - seems they don't care who's lives they mess up?

[BLADES65]

Hi

I think this is a true executed copy of a newspaper that has been out in the rain for few days.

Send them the usual faiure to comply clock is ticking don't dare put anythngon my credit record or i will have you letter.

Report them to the oFT and then fill in the letter above so we can add it to the list of complints to the dti.

 

Best regards

Peter

 

Thanks Peter. Any templates for such a letter available based on the totally illegible excuse for an agreement they have sent.

 

Regards

 

BLADES65

[lookinforinfo]

Even with a combination of spectacles and eyesight, I was unable to discern

very much at all on the copy of the agreement. And I couldn't copy it and paste it to Notepad so that I could increase the font size either.

So I had no way of knowing whether it was the original agreement or an appliction. On that basis, I tried to make the point [unsuccessfully ] that

were it a copy of the executed agreement, simply waiting for the time to expire may not work.

After all, if a company does not provide any documents whatever, then there is no doubt that an offence has been committed. Whereas, in this case, unless one informs the supplier that the copy is illegible-how are they to know? Legibility is a much more subjective matter than non production. Some

will be able to read it much more easily than others. You just have to look at the comparison between NCFs' interpretation and mine on the copy.

 

So my argument was that just to sit back and not inform them that you couldn't read the copy would not be sufficient reason to have the debt

pronounced unenforceable if the copy was that of the original agreemnet [and it's not every day that you get to read a sentence that contains a triple negative. In fact it's a moot point whether "unenforceable" would make it a

quadruple negative ].

And by not informing them that you couldn't read it may even rule out the

possibility of them having committed an offence [that would only be in cases where the copy was of the OA.

 

I hope that has cleared up my previous post0-I am sorry for the misunderstanding.

Now I will go and have a look at Sheffields' post.

[pudsters14]

Hello everyone, sorry to be a complete pain but could anyone have a look at my thread and let me know what you think

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/95689-mitzbag-mbna.html#post883866

[pudsters14]

Oh and this is a link to it on the MBNA thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mbna/72811-mbna-properly-executed-agreements-23.html

[Destinyofsouls]

Please help a thicko!

I have trawled through the CCA from links in jonnis thread to searching on google, but I cannot find a section 85 , it only goes up to 71 or so.

 

All I've seen is Section 85 refers to agreements pre 1985

 

Could someone offer me a link to the said act?

[noomill060]

Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

Enjoy your evenings reading!

[ncf355]

http://www.fisa.co.uk/downloads/CCA%201974.pdf

 

Page 50 is the exact location, just in case the above gets confusing

[Destinyofsouls]

Thank you both.

[Destinyofsouls]

Could someone clairfy the following for me please.

Section 85

Whenever, in connection with a credit-token agreement, a credit-token (other

than the first) is given by the creditor to the debtor, the creditor shall give the debtor a

copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it.

(2) If the creditor fails to comply with this section—

(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement; So they send one, apologise and you start to pay back?

and

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

(3) This section does not apply to a small agreement. What is this?

 

 

[monopoly23]

A small agreement is for £30 or less I think

[Peterbard]

Could someone clairfy the following for me please.

 

Section 85

Whenever, in connection with a credit-token agreement, a credit-token (other

than the first) is given by the creditor to the debtor, the creditor shall give the debtor a

copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it.

(2) If the creditor fails to comply with this section—

(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement; So they send one, apologise and you start to pay back?

and

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

(3) This section does not apply to a small agreement. What is this?

 

 

 

 

 

hi

A small agreement acording to section 17 of the act is £50.

If they produce the document even after the alloted time they are allowed to pursue the agreement but they are not allowed to charge any interest during the period of default

 

 

 

Regards

 

Petr

[monopoly23]

I stand corrected :o

I could have sworn it was £30 too...

OOPS

[Peterbard]

bloody inflation!!

[hisholinessthepope]

It was £30 but then it was passed to DCA and suddenly it's £50. Who needs inflation when you can add on whichever bus is going past!

[Destinyofsouls]

hi

A small agreement acording to section 17 of the act is £50.

If they produce the document even after the alloted time they are allowed to pursue the agreement but they are not allowed to charge any interest during the period of default

 

 

 

Regards

 

Petr

So, let me get this right. If you are sent a replacement credit card with no copy of the original agreement, the debt is unenforceable. So, after you tell them, they send you a copy and then it makes it OK, all you gain is a little interest. Is that right?

[Peterbard]

HI

I think we should take some affirative action about the discraceful none action of the OFT.

What i am suggesting is a letter of complaint to the DTI with a few examples on board.

I would like this to be a joint effort so what i have done is produce a rough draft document and invite modifications and especially cases that comply in the form of X verses y defaulted such adate reprted to OFT sucha date no action taken .

just copy the document and post any recomendations to changes in tthe form of the letter and esecially your experiances with the OFT I would hope to get this in the post by the end of the week preferably sooner

 

Best regards

and here it is Peter

 

 

Date

 

Ian McCarty DTI

 

Ref: refusal or inability for the OFT to enforce defaults and offences of the consumer credit act 1974.

 

Dear Sirs

 

We write to you in a matter of great concern regarding the above.

Currently there are a number of creditors that blatantly disregard the requests made by members of the public to provide information as regulated by section180 of the act.

We have a number of records of cases where creditors have failed to comply with the copy of documents regulations in particular sections 77-78 and are currently in the position where they are not only in default by none compliance but have committed an offence.

The designated procedure in these cases is to report the offence to the OFT for investigation and subsequent prosecution if required.

We find however that the response we receive from the OFT is that they cannot afford to pursue the action.

The result of this is that the creditor continues unlawfully to pursue the debt.

A brief example of the cases currently in this position detailed below

 

Example

• 12 May 2007: Request received by capital one for copy documents undet section 77.
  
• 26th May 2007:No response after first statutory period 12 working days they are now in default.
  
• 26th May2007 Offence reported to OFT 25th May Case Number ********
  
• Creditor continues unlawful pursuance of debt.
  
• 26th June 2007:Stil no response From Capital with correct documentation.
  
• 27th june the creditor have now committed an offence this is reported again to the OFT.
  
• No action taken by OFT due to shortage of recources.
  
• Creditor continues to unlawfully pursue agreement irrespetive of the legisation.

Obviously your details will be different you may not have a case nimbler or you may not have reported until after the full 42 days just adapt where necessary.

You can PM me and i will add the details to the letter or Copy and paste this posting back on the thread with your details on it and I will combine it with the others, (with the posters permission) before i send the completed letter. I will post it in full in case the are any alteration people want to make.

If there are any details you want to send but do not want posting let me know and i will leave them off the final posting but include them in the letter.

I do not want anyone to take offence at me doing this off the cuff but we need to do something.

 

Best regards

Peter

 

HI RE Letter to DTI regarding none compliance with section77-78 requests

 

I wondered if it would simplify matters if we put the information in a standard form. If you are in the situation of have notified the OFT or T/S and are having no luck perhaps you would copy this to a word doc fill it in and email it to

 

[email protected]

 

Type of request (section 77/78)

 

Date Request sent

 

Response within 12 working days if any

 

Response within 42 days if any

 

Date default reported to OFT/TS

 

Case Number given if any

 

Response from OFT

 

Comments on conduct of creditor whilst in default if applicable

 

Comments on feedback from OFT/ TS

[Diddy]

Does this stand up as a Bona Fide CCA. I have removed my signature and personal details. Thanks again.

 

Page 1

 

 

Page 2

 

Any advice on this is much appreciated. Thanks.

[yaffsimone1]

Anyone....Doesn't an agreement have to be missing just one prescribed term for it to be unenforceable? Like no Credit Limit shown, should it have the account number on it too, so you know it does actually relate to your account?

[pudsters14]

I think that the prescribed terms should be in the signature document... things like the interest rate etc.

 

There will be some ppl on here soon that are more knowledgeable than me tho.

 

Good luck!

 

Pudsters14

x x x x x x

[ian1969uk]

It does have the credit limit. It has a statement saying they will determine it from time to time and inform the customer, this is acceptable.

 

The issue with these Egg agreements (I have one the same) is that there is no way we can link the two pages together to know they are one document. It also lacks details of the default charges. Whilst this isn't a prescribed term, and so the lack of it wouldn't make it completely unenforceable, it is required to be there. This agreement would, therefore, be improperly executed and enforceable with the order of the courts only.

 

One thing, though, did you blank out the signature or haven't you ever signed it?