Cap1 & CCA return

[Peterbard]

Hi all,

I've just had a reply from Cap1 re my CCA rqst, and subsequent rqst (as the first reply was to supply the new T&C's they're pushing on everyone).

If anyone would care to have a look for me, I would be very grateful.

 

thanks Perseus

 

(ps - I scribbled over the personal details, so to me, it looks like they have just copied the application form and sent it out. There was a reference number in the 'Customer Box', and at the very bottom of the page - but did not relate to the card account number.

This is literally all that I received, no other supporting docs, not two sided, no nothing at all. AND, there was also PPi on this account which was used, but on here was marked as no thanks! - strange.

 

 

Cant see any prescribed terms it is not in my opinion an enforceable agreement

[elizabeth1]

Perseus - this is an application form - not a CCA at all

STUFF MISSING IS = (I already had an answer to this thanks Pam!!)

1) The creditor's address is not shown

2) the line 'Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974'

is meant to be a heading - shown prominently, not at the bottom of the page

3) The credit limit or how it is to be determined is not shown

4) A statement of how the rate of repayments is to be worked out is not

shown

5) The APR and how/when it may be varied is not shown

6) A statutory statement about the limit of liability for loss or misuse

of the credit card is not present

7) A statutory statement about the possibility of being able to claim

for faulty goods etc from either the trader or the credit card issuer as

per CCA s75 is not present.

[Peterbard]

Perseus, the link is missing?

 

Guy's can we please get back on track!

 

As you know MS are in Criminal Default:-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/82841-angry-cat-morgan-stanley.html?highlight=angry+cat#post740352

 

I have reported the Offence to TS

MS are reliant on 1983 regs regulation 3

TS say that MS have not complied due to 1983 Regs reg 7

 

TS informed MS that they should write to me setting out their view and that if I had not received this communication within 10 days, then I should re-contact TS.

Well the 10 days are now up and of course I have not received anything from MS (I didn't think that I would!)

 

Tomorrow, I will ring TS and I really want to put the pressure on them.

Previously TS have stated that they will not, cannot prosecute due to a lack of established case law.

 

I have found the following:-

DTI v Lloyds Tsb

Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc & Ors [2006] EWCA Civ 268 (22 March 2006)

and

wilson v secretary of state

House of Lords - Wilson and others v. Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Appellant)

 

If any of you guys can come up with any brilliant ideas then I would be most grateful. If I can put TS into a position whereby they retreat...I need a plan.

 

AC

Hi AC

Is Pam helping you with this one?

 

I am a bit confused you are claiming penalty charges which have recieved the usual B,S reply but you are also claiming that the agrement is unenforceable is that right?

 

Like i say i would love to help but i need more information.

 

 

Peter

[Perseus]

Thank you Peter and Elizabeth for your info.

Much appreciated.

 

Watch out Cap1, here we come...

 

[rippedoffagain]

Question;

 

A Gournsey registered company is chasing my daughter for a very small outstanding balance (£21 which is disputed). They are not registered with the IC, and I presume they needn't be, but if they do not need to adhere to UK law, what right would they have to pursue in a UK court?

[Peterbard]

Hi

 

I can't remember if he has or not but the OFT doc 2003 on cancellable agreements has this paragraph in the section relating to copies that must be given when an agreement is first entered into:

 

The general requirement for copy documents is that one copy of the agreement (including, if applicable, a notice of cancellation rights) must be given or sent to the customer when the original agreement is given or sent to him for signature. A first copy is not required where the agreement is neither presented personally nor sent to the customer for signature – for example, a document which is also an application form that a prospective customer picks up from a shop counter or from a leaflet dispenser.

 

So I just urge caution in assuming that an application form cannot be an agreement!

 

Regards, Pam

hi Pam Uni

I was rather hurt to see that you doubted the existance of my correxpindence with the DTI so here is a sectionn of it that relates to the issue under discussion. If you wan't to view the full letter i will have to find it in the early stages of the loan company thread i have posted it a few times now.

DTI

RT Hon Ian McCartney MP

Minister for Trade Investment and Foreign Affairs

James Purnell MP

The Consttuency Office

Hyde Town Hall

Hyde

SK14 1AL

Dear James

“Thank you for your letter of 7th December on behalf of your constituent Mr Peter Bardsley of---------------------”

There follows some stuff about the section 77 requests not having to include a signature which is part of an ongoing dialogue we are having.

And continues

“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 the 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 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 made on unscrupulous companies adjusting agreements………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Ian McCartney

Peter

[smartmartian10]

After several letters and me stopping payments, Alliance & Leicester have final sent me a copy of my loan agreement. I sent the original request 12FEB07!

 

Anyway it is a genuine agreement, with signatures from both of us and the prescribed stuff. It also has the terms and conditions attached. In fact the loan account number is on all three pages. So they can get it right sometimes. Mind you the agreement is from April 2003 so am not that surprised.

 

Now have to tell payplan to start paying them again.

[ncf355]

A+L are actually v ghood at this, I'm planning on using their agreement copies as evidence in court of what others should look like!

 

[smartmartian10]

LOL my thoughts exactly ncf355 - hence my post.

 

It can be done and according to the CCA it has to be done!

 

Anyway still have the charges on the account to recover

[spiritgirl59]

Good luck Perseus ;-)

 

You might want to see my thread (spiritgirl -v- various DCAs) and have a read (and a smile) at the conversation I had today, as it was actually with Capital One!

 

Thank you from me to Elizabeth and Peter for their very helpful advice on this thread - its very useful to me too x

 

Spiritgirl x

[angry cat]

Hi AC

Is Pam helping you with this one?

 

I am a bit confused you are claiming penalty charges which have recieved the usual B,S reply but you are also claiming that the agrement is unenforceable is that right?

 

Like i say i would love to help but i need more information.

 

Guy's can we please get back on track!

 

As you know MS are in Criminal Default:-

Angry Cat V Morgan Stanley Ms Cannot Find Credit Agreement

 

I have reported the Offence to TS

MS are reliant on 1983 regs regulation 3

TS say that MS have not complied due to 1983 Regs reg 7

 

TS informed MS that they should write to me setting out their view and that if I had not received this communication within 10 days, then I should re-contact TS.

Well the 10 days are now up and of course I have not received anything from MS (I didn't think that I would!)

 

Tomorrow, I will ring TS and I really want to put the pressure on them.

Previously TS have stated that they will not, cannot prosecute due to a lack of established case law.

 

I have found the following:-

DTI v Lloyds Tsb

Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc & Ors [2006] EWCA Civ 268 (22 March 2006)

and

wilson v secretary of state

House of Lords - Wilson and others v. Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Appellant)

 

If any of you guys can come up with any brilliant ideas then I would be most grateful. If I can put TS into a position whereby they retreat...I need a plan.

 

AC

 

Nobody is helping me, I am battling (this one) on my own.

 

The first link was just to show the MS Defence re: claiming back charges: the defence clearly stated that MS could not locate the alleged Agreement in 2006

MS to date, is unable to provide the Agreement requested last July 2006, MS breached CCA 1974 S78 in August 2006, thus committed an Offence at that time...MS are still in Criminal Default of the CCA 1974.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/33174-consumer-credit-act-agreements-272.html#post705004

 

Tomorrow, I intend to put extreme pressure on TS to prosecute MS...All that I asked the forum was for any extra ammunition.

 

An exasperated and very scratchy Cat.

 

God, I wish that I was a Barrister, I know that there is an established case law somewhere that would enable me to make TS prosecute.

 

AC

[elizabeth1]

Good luck Perseus ;-)

 

You might want to see my thread (spiritgirl -v- various DCAs) and have a read (and a smile) at the conversation I had today, as it was actually with Capital One!

 

Thank you from me to Elizabeth and Peter for their very helpful advice on this thread - its very useful to me too x

 

Spiritgirl x

 

Spiritgirl,

 

I just had the info to hand as another board member had helped me previously etc.. - that agreement was the same as mione so same stuff would apply etc..

 

I shall come and look for your thread - CAP1 are hilarious!! I haven't had so much fun in ages as watching this company talk so much rubbish - they need to admit they are wrong and stop abusing the court system - they know they'll never appear in court and tell a Judge why they are doing the stuff they are doing :grin:

[Perseus]

Good luck Perseus ;-)

 

You might want to see my thread (spiritgirl -v- various DCAs) and have a read (and a smile) at the conversation I had today, as it was actually with Capital One!

 

Thank you from me to Elizabeth and Peter for their very helpful advice on this thread - its very useful to me too x

 

Spiritgirl x

 

Thank you Spirit, I'm just about to read it now.

 

Pers

[InKogneeToh]

hi Pam Uni

I was rather hurt to see that you doubted the existance of my correxpindence with the DTI so here is a sectionn of it that relates to the issue under discussion. If you wan't to view the full letter i will have to find it in the early stages of the loan company thread i have posted it a few times now.

 

DTI

RT Hon Ian McCartney MP

Minister for Trade Investment and Foreign Affairs

 

James Purnell MP

 

The Consttuency Office

Hyde Town Hall

Hyde

SK14 1AL

 

Dear James

 

“Thank you for your letter of 7th December on behalf of your constituent Mr Peter Bardsley of---------------------”

 

There follows some stuff about the section 77 requests not having to include a signature which is part of an ongoing dialogue we are having.

And continues

 

“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 the 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 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 made on unscrupulous companies adjusting agreements………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

 

 

 

Ian McCartney

Peter

 

HI Peter

 

I wasn't doubting you - I just wanted to point out the part in the OFT 'cancellable agreements' doc that seems to conflict with this.

 

Also there is still the fact that a court has discretion to enforce ANY document that contains all of the prescribed terms and the debtors signature, as per s127(3).

 

So, IMO there is no room for complacency over application forms until this gets tested properly in a court case.

 

That's my view anyway!

 

Regards, Pam

[Acerfan]

Sorry to interrupt, but is there any chance of someone taking a look at my thread Suspect I have no loan agrrement

 

please? Would really appreciate some help.

[davefirewalker]

Perseus, the link is missing?

 

Guy's can we please get back on track!

 

As you know MS are in Criminal Default:-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/82841-angry-cat-morgan-stanley.html?highlight=angry+cat#post740352

 

I have reported the Offence to TS

MS are reliant on 1983 regs regulation 3

TS say that MS have not complied due to 1983 Regs reg 7

 

TS informed MS that they should write to me setting out their view and that if I had not received this communication within 10 days, then I should re-contact TS.

Well the 10 days are now up and of course I have not received anything from MS (I didn't think that I would!)

 

Tomorrow, I will ring TS and I really want to put the pressure on them.

Previously TS have stated that they will not, cannot prosecute due to a lack of established case law.

 

I have found the following:-

DTI v Lloyds Tsb

Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc & Ors [2006] EWCA Civ 268 (22 March 2006)

and

wilson v secretary of state

House of Lords - Wilson and others v. Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Appellant)

 

If any of you guys can come up with any brilliant ideas then I would be most grateful. If I can put TS into a position whereby they retreat...I need a plan.

 

AC

 

 

Hi AC

 

I'm almost in the same boat with MS, not quite as far as you though.

 

they sent me a crap application and admitted as much, and when challenged came back with the same reg 3 argument. Ive told them to put up or shut up, and am waiting for a response.

 

dave

[paulwlton]

Interesting development regarding my section 85 claim. I've just received a phone call. The cheque is on its way.

 

Paul

[pford]

Interesting development regarding my section 85 claim. I've just received a phone call. The cheque is on its way.

 

Paul

 

 

Which bank is this with

[humbleman]

Interesting development regarding my section 85 claim. I've just received a phone call. The cheque is on its way.

 

Paul

WOW tell us more

[davefirewalker]

yes please

[Peterbard]

HI Peter

 

I wasn't doubting you - I just wanted to point out the part in the OFT 'cancellable agreements' doc that seems to conflict with this.

 

Also there is still the fact that a court has discretion to enforce ANY document that contains all of the prescribed terms and the debtors signature, as per s127(3).

 

So, IMO there is no room for complacency over application forms until this gets tested properly in a court case.

 

That's my view anyway!

 

Regards, Pam

 

Hi Pam

 

I see no contradiction between what is in the Cancellation leaflet where it refers to an agreement beeing used init's unexecuted state as an application it requires two sigs and has all the terms to become correctly executed.

An application can not be executed as it would only have one signature the signature of the applicant and would not be acceptable.

My opinion the DTI 's opinion can't say any more we will agree to differ.

 

Regards

Peter

[maybelline]

BBC NEWS | Business | Watchdog probes cost of banking

 

more about OFT investigation.

[Peterbard]

Hi AC

Is Pam helping you with this one?

 

I am a bit confused you are claiming penalty charges which have recieved the usual B,S reply but you are also claiming that the agrement is unenforceable is that right?

 

Like i say i would love to help but i need more information.

 

Guy's can we please get back on track!

 

As you know MS are in Criminal Default:-

Angry Cat V Morgan Stanley Ms Cannot Find Credit Agreement

 

I have reported the Offence to TS

MS are reliant on 1983 regs regulation 3

TS say that MS have not complied due to 1983 Regs reg 7

 

TS informed MS that they should write to me setting out their view and that if I had not received this communication within 10 days, then I should re-contact TS.

Well the 10 days are now up and of course I have not received anything from MS (I didn't think that I would!)

 

Tomorrow, I will ring TS and I really want to put the pressure on them.

Previously TS have stated that they will not, cannot prosecute due to a lack of established case law.

 

I have found the following:-

DTI v Lloyds Tsb

Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc & Ors [2006] EWCA Civ 268 (22 March 2006)

and

wilson v secretary of state

House of Lords - Wilson and others v. Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Appellant)

 

If any of you guys can come up with any brilliant ideas then I would be most grateful. If I can put TS into a position whereby they retreat...I need a plan.

 

AC

 

Nobody is helping me, I am battling (this one) on my own.

 

The first link was just to show the MS Defence re: claiming back charges: the defence clearly stated that MS could not locate the alleged Agreement in 2006

MS to date, is unable to provide the Agreement requested last July 2006, MS breached CCA 1974 S78 in August 2006, thus committed an Offence at that time...MS are still in Criminal Default of the CCA 1974.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/33174-consumer-credit-act-agreements-272.html#post705004

 

Tomorrow, I intend to put extreme pressure on TS to prosecute MS...All that I asked the forum was for any extra ammunition.

 

An exasperated and very scratchy Cat.

 

God, I wish that I was a Barrister, I know that there is an established case law somewhere that would enable me to make TS prosecute.

 

AC

 

HI AC

 

Could you pm me a synopsys of your case and the replys from ms and ts.

 

 

Peter

[elizabeth1]

Which bank is this with

 

 

Brilliant!!!

[Guest Battleaxe]

This is fantastic news Paul, we had it right, or they don't it to be tested in Court.