Cap1 & CCA return

[adarling2006]

i've just had a wee look at the OFT's report on what agreements must contain and details of Default charges is a prescribed term. If any agreement doesn't have all the prescribed terms isn't it just as unenforceable under section 127(3)????

[davefirewalker]

Details of default charges is a required term NOT a prescribed term. without it the agreement may still be enforced but by order of a court only.

 

the prescribed terms are ONLY

 

amount of credit

credit limit

rate of interest

repayments

 

 

hope this helps

 

Dave

[Peterbard]

Hi

Been off sick for a bit trying to catch up.

 

The prescribed termes Re section 88 are the ones quoted within the section iitself and not the prescribed terms relataing to drvtion 60 of the act which are contained within the 1983/1553 regs.

 

The enforceability of a default is not realy an issue becase it is not enfoced anyway it is mearly the last step before the creditor is allowed to take the actions described in the section(88) and therefor before court action.

 

The prescried terms of the default notice have been augmented greatly by the 2006 cca and should include default payment information and even a pre drafted notice frome the OFT.

 

Failure to provide a proper defalt can be used to set asside a judjement or

as a defence against a litigation being comenced by the creditor.

 

 

Best regards

 

Peter

[BLADES65]

Received a lovely letter from 1st Credit regarding MBNA Credit Card.

 

 

 

 

I have also checked my credit file and discovered that 1st Credit are the creditors and not MBNA. On all their correspondence they have refered to MBNA as their client.

 

I have had no confirmation of the sale to 1st Credit.

 

Following the letter above I have received this:

 

 

And these Blue Peter T&C's. Note they have written 97 on them in pen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also in the T&c's under CHARGES FOR BREACH the fees are £12. I was sure they charged far more than this in 1997.

 

Also how can it be proved these go with the illegible copy first supplied.

 

Still the threat of Bankruptcy proceedings.

 

Whats the next stage people.

 

Thanks

[dpick]

Hi MBNA T/C with 12 default charges came into force between June and July 2006 and are not retrospective the Muppet's shoot themselves again

 

all

[BLADES65]

Hi MBNA T/C with 12 default charges came into force between June and July 2006 and are not retrospective the Muppet's shoot themselves again

 

all

 

 

Surely they have also constructed/ cut and pasted these terms and conditions to suggest they are from 1997.

 

Isn't that fraud.?

[ncf355]

Indeed!

 

I would be inclined to contact OFT, TS, Possibly the fraud squad?

 

Anyone else have an opinion on the fraud and best way to go?

[BLADES65]

Indeed!

 

I would be inclined to contact OFT, TS, Possibly the fraud squad?

 

Anyone else have an opinion on the fraud and best way to go?

 

 

All opinions most welcome.

 

I'm fired up to take this all the way.

 

MBNA's charges pre OFT were £25.00.

[Peterbard]

Hi

At best they could claim this is a 2nd copy as per stection 63 which it isn't and it definately is not what you asked for write back tell them you want a true copy of the orriginal agreement as per secton 78 and a copy of some tems and conditions which are not even from the correct date of execution will not do .Quote this from the DTI if you like

dti

 

21 December 2006

 

Re consumer credit act 1974

 

Thank you for your letter of the 7th of December on behalf of your constituent Mr Peter Bardsley of******************* about a possible irregularity in the Consumer Credit act 1974.

 

The Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations apply to all the situations that ate listed in the Schedule to the Regulations and this include Sections 77 and 78 of the Act, which are about copies of the executed agreement and not pre contractual information

 

The Cancellation Notices and copies of Documents Regulations are made under Section 180 of the Act ) power to prescribe the form etc of documents) and Section 180 enables Regulations to be made to provide for including/excluding certain information from copies sent out under the Act. The Regulations apply to all copies sent our under the Act unless specifically excluded in the Regulations themselves.

 

Mr Bardsley describes a situation in which he was sent a copy of a company’s standard Terms and Conditions when requesting a copy of a signed agreement form. Just sending the Terms and Conditions is a breach of the Act and Regulations as, apart from the information that the Regulations provide that you may exclude, the copy must be a “true copy” of the agreement**

 

If Mr Bardsley feels that the rules are being flouted he should report the companies concerned to Trading standards and the Office of Fair Trading. It is also a breach of the Act and the Regulations to send the application form rather that a “true copy” of the Agreement.

On the point that Mr Bardsley makes about unscrupulous companies adjusting agreements, If there were a dispute about an agreement, the lender would need to prove to a court that there was an agreement and, it is highly likely that the lender would have to produce the original signed document to prove they had and agreement with the consumer to start with,

The lender should need to prove to a court that there was and agreement **and, it is highly likely that the lender would have to produce the original signed document to prove they had an agreement with the consumer to start with. If the lender can’t prove the existence of the agreement, winning any court case would prove difficult.

 

 

Approved By the Minister and signed in His presence

 

Pp Ian Mc Cartney

[davefirewalker]

Hi

Been off sick for a bit trying to catch up.

 

The prescribed termes Re section 88 are the ones quoted within the section iitself and not the prescribed terms relataing to drvtion 60 of the act which are contained within the 1983/1553 regs.

 

The enforceability of a default is not realy an issue becase it is not enfoced anyway it is mearly the last step before the creditor is allowed to take the actions described in the section(88) and therefor before court action.

 

The prescried terms of the default notice have been augmented greatly by the 2006 cca and should include default payment information and even a pre drafted notice frome the OFT.

 

Failure to provide a proper defalt can be used to set asside a judjement or

as a defence against a litigation being comenced by the creditor.

 

 

Best regards

 

Peter

 

Hi Peter

 

Good to see you back again

 

I think that the OP meant that there was no section on "DEFAULT CHARGES" on his agreement, making it unenforceable. Nothing to do with a DEFAULT NOTICE.

 

Default charges are only a required term NOT a prescribed term.

 

but you are right anyway about the default notices, I am using that argument against Morgan Stanley as we speak

 

rgds

 

dave

[Peterbard]

Hi

Sorry did i get hold of the wrong end of the stick?

as you quite rightly say they cant charge default charges unless they are mentioned in the agreement but you cannot use this to make the agreement unenfoceable as it is not a prescribed term.

Best of luck with your action against MS keep us posted

 

Best regards

 

Peter

[BLADES65]

Hi Peter,

 

The letter from 1st Credit states in the first paragraph:

 

'These in conjunction with the true copy of the agreement sent to you fulfill the relevant obligations under the Consumer Credit act.'

 

This is the agreement sent previously and which I responded thanking them for the true executed copy however it is not enforceable.

 

 

What are your views on the T&C's being a cut and paste re-construction.

 

Thanks

[Josie8]

Hi Peter

 

 

rgds

 

dave

 

.....

Edited January 21, 2009 by Josie8

[Peterbard]

Hi Peter,

 

The letter from 1st Credit states in the first paragraph:

 

'These in conjunction with the true copy of the agreement sent to you fulfill the relevant obligations under the Consumer Credit act.'

 

This is the agreement sent previously and which I responded thanking them for the true executed copy however it is not enforceable.

 

 

What are your views on the T&C's being a cut and paste re-construction.

 

Thanks

I would just invite them to try and enforce it and enclose the LBA for your refund of charges.

Regards

Peter

[dpick]

Hi Peter,

 

The letter from 1st Credit states in the first paragraph:

 

'These in conjunction with the true copy of the agreement sent to you fulfill the relevant obligations under the Consumer Credit act.'

 

This is the agreement sent previously and which I responded thanking them for the true executed copy however it is not enforceable.

 

 

What are your views on the T&C's being a cut and paste re-construction.

 

Thanks

 

Hi these T/C are just the same 4 A4 typed pages with the £12 charges that became active in June/July 2006 (from my statements) that I received from MBNA for my former Bank of Scotland card issued in February 2000 now an MBNA card, they are not pertaining to your card when issued. Another bit of PAP from MBNA.

 

I have told MBNA where to stick these T/C

 

dpick:p

[Peterbard]

Morgan Stanley have just sent me a credit card mailer with an agreement on back post OFT as charges are 12.00 - clearly not a true copy of my original. Infortunately for them I do have a copy of original (which is not enforceable I think) so am quite interested to see what they produce next...........

 

Or should I accept it as a true copy but not enforceable because it isn't ....if you see what I mean:?:

 

I think i would send them back a letter saying that this could not be a true copy because of the reasons you have outlined.

And remind them the clock is still ticking for the 42 days.

Every case is different and why not use this to see exactly what they have got.

You can not loose by keeping them in default a bit longer and you have an ace up your sleive.

 

Something else i have just used on someones behalf when no coherent reply was sent for a credit card application cca was secton 51 of the act The one that says it is unlawful to supply a credit card without being requested.

 

They have to prove you requeste a card. Like i say all cases are different the person i refer to had no response at all from the Card Company Cap 1).

 

Best regards

Peter

they gave in and paid her charges.

[davefirewalker]

regarding the recent t&c sent

 

Would it not help to use s.172 Statements by creditor or owner to be binding

and then accept these as what was provided to satisfy s.78

 

then you can show the judge the originals and the crap agreement they sent

 

Just a thought

 

Also Josie8 you could use the same argument

 

Morgan Stanley have just sent me a credit card mailer with an agreement on back post OFT as charges are 12.00 - clearly not a true copy of my original. Infortunately for them I do have a copy of original (which is not enforceable I think) so am quite interested to see what they produce next...........

 

Or should I accept it as a true copy but not enforceable because it isn't ....if you see what I mean:?:

 

 

Dave

[joemarket]

hi there everyone,

I have just received a letter from capital one rejecting my request for a refund of my ppi. I just received my six year statments capital one when I noticed the monies debited from my account for ppi payment. since I could not recall purchasing a ppi I wrote and requested a copy of my original credit agreement. They cannot provide such agreement as the ppi was sold over the phone. I wonder if this is legal. Capital bank has directed I could write to FSA if am not satisfied. I am not sure what to do next. Please can anyone help!

[davefirewalker]

firstly SAR them, do a FULL request including any transcripts, system notes etc.

 

this, should get the info you require. if they say that they are unable to find any reference to the ppi, then immediately file an N1

 

the same is happening to me with Monument.

 

rgds

 

dave

[Peterbard]

HI

This is a typical first respnse from Crap 1 they must be reminded that the burden of proof is on the to proove that you aplied for this not for you to prove you didn't.

I would just write to them and say i understand that their is no evidance of my ever requesting ppi on this account which supports my contention that i never applied .

I will give you 7 days to provide any proof to the contrary then continue with my litigatiion

Dave is probably right with his last chance letter but i am a bit meaner and a tenner is a tenner

 

Best regards

Peter

[paulwlton]

Faked Agreements and statements will be seen by millions on prime time TV in August, the documentary will be shown on a Friday at 7.30 pm.

 

This will be damning for a major high street bank.

 

Paul

[maybelline]

cant wait! we all know it happens, will we have a transcript on here we can use to support our claims, just in case the courts dont believe the lovely creditors do this!

[davey77]

Which program is this? Watchdog or Panorama or something. You you know?

[paulwlton]

Which program is this? Watchdog or Panorama or something. You you know?

 

 

I'll post details when the date has been confirmed.

 

Paul

[Josie8]

..............

Edited January 21, 2009 by Josie8