Cap1 & CCA return

[Seahorse]

THEY DO NOT ALL CONTAIN CLUES

 

Well, that's Sherlock knackered then.

[Smoothy]

Fantasy...its not that were not listening to you....its just, how do you prove to them that they are in the wrong if there is an element of doubt?

I will not stick my neck out if there is a minute chance of me being wrong.

I would rather have something to quote and rely on that is factual. Yes, i sent a sec78 request in. Yes i got a printed off copy of my agreement (as you know!) and yes i got a printed off copy of the t&c's.

My problem is, are they enough to comply with my request and enforce the debt?......how do I know that the t&c's they sent as they are on a separate piece of paper are the original ones that were on my agreement?!! Anybody can edit a document and add information at whim but without the original agreement as proof, I am forced to accept what they have sent. Terminator said it way..way....back in the thread...if it went to court they must supply the original so why not supply it when it is requested? Do these banks not have the facility to produce double sided copies? This mm/yy proves nothing to me as a layman. So far I have only received one executed agreement and t&c's that have the same reference number on them. But even they were photocopies so how im i expected to believe they were originally the same document?

I am not questioning your logic, just verifying mine!

[InKogneeToh]

Smoothy, don't worry, I'm going to get that precedent set (or unset as the case may be). AQ's due in a week and we're talking non-compliance of s78, therefore not allowed to pursue debt as defence stage 1. Stage 2 includes s85, stage 3 includes attacking copy sent, stage 4 involves ....... erm, probably paying!!

 

Hi

 

Good luck with your case m55 and we all want you to win this but unfortunately county court judgments do not set precedent.

 

The case would have to go much higher for this and we 'don't want to give you that!' :o

 

Regards, Pam

[m55dlc]

Thanks Pam, feeling small again.....

 

What I meant, obviously (duh!) is that I'll be testing that premise!

 

And what don't you want to give me?

[Guest Battleaxe]

Banks to Face MP's Probe

Banks are to be investigated by MR's amid allegations of profiteering, rip-offs and threats to impose annual fees on current accounts.

The powerful treasury select committee has announced an inquiry in the wake of figures showing the eight biggest names made more that £40 billion last year.

MP's are concerned the banks may be operating a complex cartel which guarantees huge profits, rather than competing on prices and value.

it has also emerged recently that banks have been making millions of pounds from illegal and unfair penalty charges.

At the moment, the banks are regulated by a voluntary code, headed by the Banking Code Standards Board.

However, MP's will consider whether this body should be replaced by a statuatory body with legal powers.

Colin Breed, a LibDem member of the committee said:'They may well rue the day when they decided to be greedy in terms of fees and charges.

'There seems to have been a sheer rush for profit, rather than recognising they have responsibilities to customers.'

 

 

This was buried on page 19 Daily Mail yesterday

[InKogneeToh]

Thanks Pam, feeling small again.....

 

What I meant, obviously (duh!) is that I'll be testing that premise!

 

And what don't you want to give me?

 

Hi

 

I didn't mean to imply that you 'is fick' or anything, only mentioned it really for new CAG readers of this thread in case they think any successful claims are setting precedent.

 

And what we don't want to give you is 'Guinea Pig' status to test this at a higher level for the benefit of the rest of us, if it comes to that.

 

Regards, Pam

[FANTASY CHARGES]

Fantasy...its not that were not listening to you....its just, how do you prove to them that they are in the wrong if there is an element of doubt?

I will not stick my neck out if there is a minute chance of me being wrong.

I would rather have something to quote and rely on that is factual. Yes, i sent a sec78 request in. Yes i got a printed off copy of my agreement (as you know!) and yes i got a printed off copy of the t&c's.

My problem is, are they enough to comply with my request and enforce the debt?......how do I know that the t&c's they sent as they are on a separate piece of paper are the original ones that were on my agreement?!! Anybody can edit a document and add information at whim but without the original agreement as proof, I am forced to accept what they have sent. Terminator said it way..way....back in the thread...if it went to court they must supply the original so why not supply it when it is requested? Do these banks not have the facility to produce double sided copies? This mm/yy proves nothing to me as a layman. So far I have only received one executed agreement and t&c's that have the same reference number on them. But even they were photocopies so how im i expected to believe they were originally the same document?

I am not questioning your logic, just verifying mine!

 

twenty years ago the scans as i call them would not be photocopied ( think of the practicalities ) there was a machine out there "on the cutting edge of technology" made by kodak Used by a bank that thought it was goahead and modern ----

where you would literally feed a4 documents ( actually they were twice a4 size with a fold down the middle ) into a machine that would scan the images and they would be stored on a cassette . I was talking about this to an X city worker over the weekend and got the full SP he is rather important now.

 

they used this procedure for allotment letters (those double sided fold out a4 pieces of paper they sent you when say TSB was privatised )they had thousands to scan as the shares were bought and sold (until the share certificates were issued) and they only ever scanned the front page -- never page 2 3 and 4 --

 

if someone had suggested scanning pages 2,3,4 then the men in white coats would have come for them

 

 

 

 

likewise if at the time someone had suggested with these terms and conditions application forms etc scanning the back ---- their boss would have called them stupid. don't you realise all 20,000 have the same backs !!!! he would say

 

 

and after you have scanned the documents (application forms) what would you do with the application forms etc file under R"

 

when are we ever going to want these one would say

 

 

below is a link to the kodak machine used nowadays -- rather smaller over 20 years on

 

 

now assuming that they in deed did use a bulky kodak scanner 20 odd years ago they might have the cassettes but that big bulky machine to read the scans has long since been thrown away ----

 

ShopMagenta | Kodak i 1310 - document scanner (1220169)

[m55dlc]

Oooh, I've never been a guinea pig before. Does that mean I have to accept what they impose because I can't use these arguements in court?

 

OK, the flip side to what you're saying is that even if this goes belly up, whatever happens in my case wouldn't affect that of another CAGer?

[InKogneeToh]

Banks to Face MP's Probe

 

Banks are to be investigated by MR's amid allegations of profiteering, rip-offs and threats to impose annual fees on current accounts.

 

The powerful treasury select committee has announced an inquiry in the wake of figures showing the eight biggest names made more that £40 billion last year.

 

MP's are concerned the banks may be operating a complex cartel which guarantees huge profits, rather than competing on prices and value.

 

it has also emerged recently that banks have been making millions of pounds from illegal and unfair penalty charges.

 

At the moment, the banks are regulated by a voluntary code, headed by the Banking Code Standards Board.

 

However, MP's will consider whether this body should be replaced by a statuatory body with legal powers.

 

Colin Breed, a LibDem member of the committee said:'They may well rue the day when they decided to be greedy in terms of fees and charges.

 

'There seems to have been a sheer rush for profit, rather than recognising they have responsibilities to customers.'

 

 

This was buried on page 19 Daily Mail yesterday

 

Very interesting - but I wonder if anything WILL actually be done about this?

 

Regards, Pam

[m55dlc]

Fantasy

 

There are specialised data bureaux who hold working machines for pretty much anything stored on magnetic media. The banks and all other interested parties can employ their services, maybe not for one or two but as soon as a significant number of these come along, the bureaux will dust off the machine and run the reverse process.

 

We had tape machines out of the ark in storage to read tapes last used in the seventies and very early eighties, just in case they we're needed. It's alot cheaper to do this than re-jig all of your archives every 5 to 10 years.

[InKogneeToh]

Oooh, I've never been a guinea pig before. Does that mean I have to accept what they impose because I can't use these arguements in court? Not sure what you mean here?

 

OK, the flip side to what you're saying is that even if this goes belly up, whatever happens in my case wouldn't affect that of another CAGer? Absolutely right - a different judge on a different day etc. - county court judgments are a bit of a lottery, higher courts will give you a majority judgment - out of 3 for High court, 5 for COP or HOL and much more intensive scrutiny of the issues.

 

Regards, Pam

[FANTASY CHARGES]

Fantasy

 

There are specialised data bureaux who hold working machines for pretty much anything stored on magnetic media. The banks and all other interested parties can employ their services, maybe not for one or two but as soon as a significant number of these come along, the bureaux will dust off the machine and run the reverse process.

 

We had tape machines out of the ark in storage to read tapes last used in the seventies and very early eighties, just in case they we're needed. It's alot cheaper to do this than re-jig all of your archives every 5 to 10 years.

 

 

but you need an index as well

 

 

 

 

 

so they put their faith in technology as they say "they chose poorly" ( not paper) even more reason to bin the originals to save on the financial budget they would be feeling pretty secure to justify the expense of technology they would save on storage space .

[Peterbard]

Pam and Bbattleaxe on the same thread again ,

Two out of three

There's trouble brewing.

 

Peter;)

[Guest Battleaxe]

We are good witches all three of us

[m55dlc]

The other thought I've had is that with the agreement I've been talking about, it mentions that instant credit is only given to customers who fill out a DD mandate? Doesn't that mean the DD mandate is therefore a part of the agreement as instant credit was given, and therefore if you don't supply that then it is incomplete? Hmmm, interesting. That is part 3 of my insurance policy!

[InKogneeToh]

Pam and Bbattleaxe on the same thread again ,

Two out of three

There's trouble brewing.

 

Peter;)

 

Well something's brewing anyway! Hubble bubble!

[m55dlc]

Are you brewing beer in fire extinguishers using potato peelings like they did on Prisoner Cell Block H?

[InKogneeToh]

Are you brewing beer in fire extinguishers using potato peelings like they did on Prisoner Cell Block H?

 

Nah, nothing as unsophisticated as that! The stuff I brew won't just cause you to see pink elephants, you'll get eaten by one!! :lol:

[rosierose]

Hello all you CCA boffins

 

I though you might like to know about a situation unfolding with a certain creditor...

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions/72443-sainsburys-bank-farce.html#post625575

[InKogneeToh]

Hello all you CCA boffins

 

I though you might like to know about a situation unfolding with a certain creditor...

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions/72443-sainsburys-bank-farce.html#post625575

 

Hi

 

Wow!! What a fiasco!

 

Have TS actually confirmed that a prosecution has been commenced or are they just considering it at this stage?

 

Regards, Pam

[rosierose]

Pam

 

They are still trying to get Sainsbury's to answer the phone! So, it's early days, but I'm given to believe they are taking it very seriously

[rippedoffagain]

Pam

 

They are still trying to get Sainsbury's to answer the phone! So, it's early days, but I'm given to believe they are taking it very seriously

 

I used to work in a store that was subject to an investigation by Trading Standards. Let me tell you their powers are way way above those of the police.

 

When they came into the store, they gave me a letter outlining these powers. They can seize documents, open safes, virtually anything they like, without a warrant.

[rosierose]

I used to work in a store that was subject to an investigation by Trading Standards. Let me tell you their powers are way way above those of the police.

 

When they came into the store, they gave me a letter outlining these powers. They can seize documents, open safes, virtually anything they like, without a warrant.

 

Oh to be a fly on the wall!

[m55dlc]

Don't TS guys have warrant cards like the police and have power to arrest?

 

Mrs DLC has a sainsburys card too, and they do call about 8 to 10 times a day, but when you try and answer, you get about 5 seconds of dead air followed occasionally (about 1 in 4) by a tetchy operator, the other times by a closed call.

 

Unfortunately for us, the s85 route will not clear the debt and the charge issue combined with the s85 will only give us back about half of the balance. And I can concur, they take no notice of cease and desist letters with regards to phone calls. Oh, and if you have made a payment but still have arrears, they stop calling for sometimes as short a period as 3 days.

 

They're next after MBNA

[rippedoffagain]

These institutions are so rich and powerful. They truly do not accept that legislation applies to them as well. The staff must work of a flow chart;

 

If a do x

If b do y

If c do z

 

If not on flow chart ignore.