Jump to content


Cap1 & CCA return


tamadus
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4937 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi Peter,

 

with regards to the Regs and the omissions allowed under 3(2) it also says they are applicable to executed agreements. Does this mean then that for unexecuted ones the Creditors cannot hide behind it?

 

regards,

shane

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Hi Paul

Accorfdng to the regulations the only things that can be ommited from a copy document are .

 

1

INformation which would be soley for the use of the creditor,I presume this means corporate info or reference numbers etc,with the proviso that the afore mentioned are not part of the requirements of the regulations ie address etc.

 

2

The signature box of the debtor, these conditions apply to all copy docs whether they be precontract secton 62 63 or secton 77 78 post contract.

 

3

Adress of debtor on agreements sent via precontractual section 62 only

 

Best regards

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

]Hi

 

Got this reponce from T/S regarding a RBS agreemeent with all the prescribed terms on but is computer stored/scanned. IMOA they do not have the original agreement. Also had no T&C with the agreement.

 

I have been in touch with the T/S in Edinburgh and we believe that the scanned copy is a sufficent copy of the agreement and therefore we will not be pursuing any criminal offences in relation to this as we do not feel it will be in the publics intrest to persue the matter formally

 

 

This is what we are up against. No mention about the lack of T&C.

 

Hi all

 

Sending this to T/S, could do with some feedback and a good ending.

 

Cheers

 

HAK

 

Dear Sir or Madam:

 

Re: Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

I am writing regarding your letter dated xxth October 2007.

 

The original complaint was regarding a breach of Section 78 of the CCA 1974 by the RBS.

 

The RBS have not supplied me with a true copy of my credit agreement but a computer stored image 5”x 4”. The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 section 3-(1) are very clear and state that every copy should be a true copy. There is no mention of computer stored documents that can be digitally altered.

 

I also informed you that the original terms and conditions were not enclosed with my request. Section 78(1) states that a credit agreement and all other documents referred to it must be supplied. As the terms and conditions where not supplied the account remains in default and the RBS have committed an offence again this is clearly stated in section 78(6).

 

I feel personally insulted the way you have stated in your letter that it is not in the publics interest to pursue this matter formally. RBS have committed an offence from an act of Parliament therefore it is Trading Standards job to get involved.

 

I find your attitude and knowledge of this offence very poor and I will be reporting you to my MP for not addressing the law as government instructed you to. I also would like you to explain to me “why it is not in the public interest” to deal with my case.

 

My request under section 78(1) still remains outstanding and RBS have committed an offence.

 

 

Yours faithfully

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fancy a laff?

 

Read this response:

 

mum-cap1page1.jpg

 

Aww, well aren't you just lovely giving me a copy of the agreement when you don't have to? - do you really think I'm that thick?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

And:

 

mum-cap1page2.jpg

 

You don't think it's unreasonable to contact me by phone? Hmmmm.....what rights do you have to contact me at all? for a start, I have asked you not to - a complete right under the Human Rights Act - secondly, you don't have ana enforcable agreement and any attempts to call me for collection are attempts to enforce it, are they not?

 

Thanks for confirming this- I'm sure the Judge will love this!!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the agreement:

 

mum-cap1page3.jpg

 

No prescribed terms, no required terms, nothing - unenforcable as doesn't comply with section 60(1)?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol Ellie Renshaw! I have a stack of letters from her!

 

''so tell me Ellie, how is it that you've complied with your obligations by providing me with t&c's that are curent now and not when i opened the acount?

 

response: ''well I, um yes, i see what you;re saying but.....''

 

''Because it does clearly say i am entitled to any document that is referred to in the alleged agreement does it not? And also the Regs do stipulate all the terms themselves must be within the agreement? In fact the form and content requirements are quite clear in these matters are they not?''

 

response: ........ ...... .......

 

''sorry, didn't catch that?''

 

response.... ..... ...

 

 

 

 

lol!!

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

mum-cap1page4.jpg

 

Hmm, the T&C's? All prescribed on here NOT sig doc, so I'm afraid they are irrelevant Ellie!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

mum-cap1page5.jpg

 

Ah yes, the "agreement" you sent me when the law changed, telling me that I was now bound by this one: I don't think so - where's my signature for a start?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

mum-cap1page6.jpg

 

I am right in thinking this is completely unenforcable by virtue of section 127(3) and section 60(1), aren't I?

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol Ellie Renshaw! I have a stack of letters from her!

 

''so tell me Ellie, how is it that you've complied with your obligations by providing me with t&c's that are curent now and not when i opened the acount?

 

response: ''well I, um yes, i see what you;re saying but.....''

 

''Because it does clearly say i am entitled to any document that is referred to in the alleged agreement does it not? And also the Regs do stipulate all the terms themselves must be within the agreement? In fact the form and content requirements are quite clear in these matters are they not?''

 

response: ........ ...... .......

 

''sorry, didn't catch that?''

 

response.... ..... ...

 

 

 

 

lol!!

 

 

I know, I've had similar responses from Egg - apparently they "have to advise me that my complaint is not accepted"

 

WHAT???? This is a criminal matter now, nothing to do with complaints -and certainly something you don't have the right to "not accept"

 

Oh, it does make me chuckle.

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uni

 

I cant se the agreement

 

 

Sorry HAK, was having trouble uploading it!

 

Think i was using the wrong link, lol!!

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uni I have to admit i'm not sure on this one. With regard to prescribed terms not being on signature document i think this is only applicable after 2005 when the statuatory instruments ammendment to the Agreement Regs came into force. It also looks like it has been reconstructed.

 

regards,

shane

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your comments Shane.

 

What makes you think it has been reconstructed?

 

I'm going to take them to court anyway, so they'll have to produce it.

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

the document in post # 9976 is either a new style of agreement they've drawn up or a reconstruction in which they tried to pack as many applicable terms as they possibly can! Do they have your signature anywhere on these documents?

 

regards,

shane

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, nooo nooo mate. That one they just sent out of the blue, saying that the law had changed and this was my new agreement!!!!!!

 

It's the previous agreement that is the one that applies to this account.

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, nooo nooo mate. That one they just sent out of the blue, saying that the law had changed and this was my new agreement!!!!!!

 

It's the previous agreement that is the one that applies to this account.

 

aha! Well that makes it a lot simpler then! I was afraid they had your signature on that new agreement!

 

The old agreement is a precontractual application form. From what i can make out it has no prescribed terms. (can't read all the txt so correct me if i'm wrong).

 

With regard to the t&c's the regulations are clear in that the terms stipulated in schedule 1 and the prescribed terms should be contained with the agreement itself and not found in another document. Nowhere does it state they can be in a separate document titled T&c's. It also ays they must be shown together as a whole and not interspersed with other information. This is clearly not the case

 

Also, the t&c's they provided you should be current from the time you opened the account, not current now. The regs state if there has been any variation in the terms then the new ones must be provided AS WELL AS the old ones, not in place of.

 

S59(1) also applies ofcourse!

 

regards,

shane

  • Haha 2

____________________________________________

All advice is offered freely & without prejudice

 

 

If my post has been useful to you please click the scales

Link to post
Share on other sites

aha! Well that makes it a lot simpler then! I was afraid they had your signature on that new agreement!

 

The old agreement is a precontractual application form. From what i can make out it has no prescribed terms. (can't read all the txt so correct me if i'm wrong).

 

With regard to the t&c's the regulations are clear in that the terms stipulated in schedule 1 and the prescribed terms should be contained with the agreement itself and not found in another document. Nowhere does it state they can be in a separate document titled T&c's. It also ays they must be shown together as a whole and not interspersed with other information. This is clearly not the case

 

Also, the t&c's they provided you should be current from the time you opened the account, not current now. The regs state if there has been any variation in the terms then the new ones must be provided AS WELL AS the old ones, not in place of.

 

S59(1) also applies ofcourse!

 

regards,

shane

 

Great mate, thanks a lot. I'll issue the N1 end of week!! :)

 

I would not put my sig on that at all!!

  • Haha 1

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shane, thanks for reminding me about section 59(1).

 

I'll get the reply written to them asap.

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

And:

secondly, you don't have ana enforcable agreement and any attempts to call me for collection are attempts to enforce it, are they not?

 

Thanks for confirming this- I'm sure the Judge will love this!!

 

I don't think this is right - if the agreement is unenforceable that doesn't mean that the debt doesn't exist? If you haven't drawn on the card, or used the credit, or even applied for the card yourself you may be able to use that argument against enforceability.

 

Remember - "no CCA=unenforceable debt", not "no CCA=no debt"

 

If you're in dispute with them, they shoudn't be hounding you like that - company policy or not!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Paul

Accorfdng to the regulations the only things that can be ommited from a copy document are .

 

1

INformation which would be soley for the use of the creditor,I presume this means corporate info or reference numbers etc,with the proviso that the afore mentioned are not part of the requirements of the regulations ie address etc.

 

2

The signature box of the debtor, these conditions apply to all copy docs whether they be precontract secton 62 63 or secton 77 78 post contract.

 

3

Adress of debtor on agreements sent via precontractual section 62 only

 

Best regards

Peter

 

Hi Peter,

 

Thanks Peter,

 

In light of this am i right in saying that this statement from RBS is intended to miss-lead.

 

A "true copy" does not need to contain any personal information relating to you as the debtor ( including your name and address- although we often include this for convenience.

 

Paul

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

 

Sending this to T/S, could do with some feedback and a good ending.

 

Cheers

 

HAK

 

Dear Sir or Madam:

 

Re: Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

I am writing regarding your letter dated xxth October 2007.

 

The original complaint was regarding a breach of Section 78 of the CCA 1974 by the RBS.

 

The RBS have not supplied me with a true copy of my credit agreement but a computer stored image 5”x 4”. The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 section 3-(1) are very clear and state that every copy should be a true copy. There is no mention of computer stored documents that can be digitally altered.

 

I also informed you that the original terms and conditions were not enclosed with my request. Section 78(1) states that a credit agreement and all other documents referred to it must be supplied. As the terms and conditions where not supplied the account remains in default and the RBS have committed an offence again this is clearly stated in section 78(6).

 

I feel personally insulted the way you have stated in your letter that it is not in the publics interest to pursue this matter formally. RBS have committed an offence from an act of Parliament therefore it is Trading Standards job to get involved.

 

I find your attitude and knowledge of this offence very poor and I will be reporting you to my MP for not addressing the law as government instructed you to. I also would like you to explain to me “why it is not in the public interest” to deal with my case.

 

My request under section 78(1) still remains outstanding and RBS have committed an offence.

 

 

Yours faithfully

 

Hi

 

I am afraid that "the not in the public interst to pusrue", is a fact that we are going to have to live with in regards to section 77 requests i have just recieved a lettere from the undersecretary on state regardsing this after a long drawn out debate which i argued strenuously to the contrarry.

He also says within the letter that creditors are allowed to to pusrsue a debt whilst the default continues but they are not allowd to threaten action which they cannot take (through the courts) i am seeking clarification that this means they cannot enter defaults or use the permission granted under the agreement to share data with credit agencies,which would seem to be the logical conclusion.

With regards to your letter to the TS have you considered using my letter of a few posts back

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general/33174-consumer-credit-act-agreements-498.html

 

it states the regulations that point to the requirements that the creditor must meet in ordr to comply with the request and especialluy in sending sepperate terms and conditions.

 

Best regards

peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Peter,

 

Thanks Peter,

 

In light of this am i right in saying that this statement from RBS is intended to miss-lead.

 

A "true copy" does not need to contain any personal information relating to you as the debtor ( including your name and address- although we often include this for convenience.

 

Paul

 

Hi Paul

 

The relavant bit is

 

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy-

(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instru­ment or other document relating to the debtor, hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;

Firstly your address is not for the use of the creditor only and secondly it is required by the regulations in schedule 1(2).

The next paragraph lust says that they are allowed to leave out signature boxes nothing about your name and address.

If this was not the case then why would the make a point of mentioning the exclussion in the case of a section 62 copy.

Best regards

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4937 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...