Jump to content


Cap1 & CCA return


tamadus
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4021 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

  • Replies 17.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Sorry...this might be going a bit off the current mood of the thread, but is an overdraft ruled by the CCA? I sent a CCA letter to Natwest ages ago re my (large) overdraft, never got a reply. Just rec'd a v nasty letter from Incasso, treating me like Pubic Enemy Number One and threatening legal action.

 

Assume I should send a SAR to Natwest.

 

But, meanwhile, what is the situation re overdrafts and the CCA?

 

The more I read on the site about this,, the more confused i get!

 

Thanks!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry...this might be going a bit off the current mood of the thread, but is an overdraft ruled by the CCA? I sent a CCA letter to Natwest ages ago re my (large) overdraft, never got a reply. Just rec'd a v nasty letter from Incasso, treating me like Pubic Enemy Number One and threatening legal action.

 

Assume I should send a SAR to Natwest.

 

But, meanwhile, what is the situation re overdrafts and the CCA?

 

The more I read on the site about this,, the more confused i get!

 

Thanks!!

Hi Cristal,

 

No, Overdrafts are not covered by CCA 1974.

 

If you take a look through the bank charges forum, you can make a claim for charges and interest on those.

 

Vint

Link to post
Share on other sites

but is an overdraft ruled by the CCA?

 

No, Overdrafts are not covered by CCA 1974

 

Not quite, actually.

 

There's a link in my signature about Overdrafts and the CCA.

 

You may want to get your head around this, too;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bank/110184-car2403-barclays-bank-default.html

 

;)

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite, actually.

 

There's a link in my signature about Overdrafts and the CCA.

 

You may want to get your head around this, too;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclays-bank/110184-car2403-barclays-bank-default.html

 

;)

 

Car, I've just glimpsed at your thread.....I know what I'll be reading today! Is it significant that Nat West has not yet put a DN on the account? I've just had a threatening letter and I'm sure a DN can't be far behind! Thanks again! Cx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overdrafts ARE covered by CCA, just the rules are a little different.

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

 

Me vs Rockwell/Tessara/RBofS: pending.

Me vs MBNA/1st Crud: Discontinued.

First Direct Overdraft: CCJ won.

IR: 2 CCJs 1 won.

Birmingham Midshires: pending

BT: pending

others to come....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Car, I've just glimpsed at your thread.....I know what I'll be reading today! Is it significant that Nat West has not yet put a DN on the account? I've just had a threatening letter and I'm sure a DN can't be far behind! Thanks again! Cx

 

Overdrafts ARE covered by CCA, just the rules are a little different.

 

Yes and one of the things that is differently, usually, is the lack of a requirement for a Default Notice - most overdrafts are terminated using a Termination Notice, which is the agreed process entered in to when the overdraft was taken out.

 

More explained in that link in my sig and throughout my thread, link above.

 

;)

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and one of the things that is differently, usually, is the lack of a requirement for a Default Notice - most overdrafts are terminated using a Termination Notice, which is the agreed process entered in to when the overdraft was taken out.

 

More explained in that link in my sig and throughout my thread, link above.

 

;)

Hi Car see you gave detention to the " unenforcable cases on hold" thread after the post up or shut up advice have posted info on Professorgbr's thread "mbna application form" After looking round i realise with some shock sending a tampered with CCA under afidavit is the norm and not something new . I was niave enough to believe that justice was for all and even large organisations were subject to it and the law of this land .:( seems not . Any Professorgbr has a case in the manchester test case circus on the 30th the wording used seems to indicate it is as much to do with handling larger number of cases of the same type ie no signed cca's in one go and if a afidavit [as we all know how honest they are ] will suffice in place of an agreement is this the case ? Thanks Car Edited by egg-sterminator
thread name
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and one of the things that is differently, usually, is the lack of a requirement for a Default Notice - most overdrafts are terminated using a Termination Notice, which is the agreed process entered in to when the overdraft was taken out.

 

More explained in that link in my sig and throughout my thread, link above.

 

;)

which is the agreed process entered in to when the overdraft was taken out,

i found i had an overdraft that had never been aggreed nor asked for in fact i made it plain and simple with the back at the time i do not require an overdraft...when in reallity the banks terminated my account on the wednesday and payed out cheques on the friday same week....ive been paying cccs for over four years,and i stopped paying them two months ago ? reason for stopping payment i asked them to provide all paperwork and statements of how much i had paid...nothing was forthcoming so hence i stopped paying them

where do i stand here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

which is the agreed process entered in to when the overdraft was taken out,

i found i had an overdraft that had never been aggreed nor asked for in fact i made it plain and simple with the back at the time i do not require an overdraft...when in reallity the banks terminated my account on the wednesday and payed out cheques on the friday same week....ive been paying cccs for over four years,and i stopped paying them two months ago ? reason for stopping payment i asked them to provide all paperwork and statements of how much i had paid...nothing was forthcoming so hence i stopped paying them

where do i stand here

 

Most likely they will say that the overdraft agreement was entered in to tacidly, (spelling?) which is one of their ways of saying you agreed by behaviour rather than asking/signing something. :rolleyes:

 

They most likely will also say that the cheques were pre-processed (delayed in processing) so were considered while the account was running. Double :rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

The key is, did they give you the T&C's or provide them when you signed up or send them shortly afterwards - if they didn't, they didn't comply with the OFT s.74 Determination and the agreement will be unenforceable as a result.

 

Is there a thread, Partick?

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overdrafts ARE covered by CCA, just the rules are a little different.
Overdrafts are covered/explained in the following OFT document (...from A.128 I think?) 'The legal and regulatory framework behind personal current accounts'...

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/financial_products/oft1005a.pdf

 

 

patrickq1: The following FOS info may be of some help...

 

Banking: when a firm decides to close a customer's account

 

 

:)

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.

And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers.

And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

(Jules Winnfield)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of overdrafts, what if a charge card debt was added to an overdraft (by chargecard, this is credit that needs to be paid in full monthly) thus putting it over its authorised credit zone limit, but it then transpires that the chargecard (which I've been told by Nwest is CCA regulated agreement) was unenforceable as it did not comply with the Act. Would there then be an argument that the chargecard debt shouldn't have been added to the O/d at all?

 

I'm not convinced, (because I haven't actually seen the agreement, and not sure if one ever even existed, although they should of course have provided one for me to sign before giving us the card) that the card is completely regulated, which is what Nwest are saying, but it will be at least partially regulated because it had a cash withdrawal facility.

 

I think they just gave us the card, because they don't seem to have any paperwork relating to it. Also, without statements for the card, I don't see how they can prove that the amounts they added to the o/d were accurate either.

 

I'm asking all of this as Nwest have taken us to court for this debt and currently defending it.

 

I do have a thread, but just wanted to ask this query specifically relating to the chargecard agreement to see if anyone could shed any light.

 

Many thanks for any help/advice,

 

Magda

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi MAGDA,

 

The following links goes some way to explain the difference between a Charge Card, a Credit Card + a Debit Card...

 

Charge Card

 

Credit Card

 

Debit Card

 

...Given that the info in the above links are 100% correct, it would imply that the 'Charge Card' in question forms part of a Credit Token Agreement...

 

Acceptance of Credit Tokens

 

 

Btw...I recently attended County Court where Natwest successfully obtained a Final Charging Order to secure amalgamated Personal Loan, Credit Card + O/D debts.

Unfortunately, I wasn't involved so as to be able to remind the defendant of questioning the possibile unenforceability of any component parts of Natwest's Claim until after the debts had previously been admitted to.

This was done at an earlier part defended hearing, where penalty bank charges formed a successful counter claim, thus negating the total amount allegedly owed.

 

Further arguments brought to the fore about the legalities of the composite agreements were dismissed outright by the DJ, despite Natwest still NOT complying with a previous direction for standard disclosure by the time that the Final hearing was held.

The DJ took the view that as bank statements that were produced showed that attributable monies had been regularly debited from the defendants current account, then they would have initally received the benefits of the good offered by Natwest + therefore Natwest were quite entitled to secure previously unsecured debts which had been defaulted upon.

 

In hindsight, an application to strike could have been made a condition of the failure to comply with the CPR Part 31, however the defended case was in the Fast Track + therefore subject to claims for substantial costs.

The fact that final costs of only approx £200 were awarded in what had become an unwinnable position spoke realms of the defendants individual fortitude when U consider that they had started fighting Natwest several years before CAG had even been dreamt of and had had to pick up the pieces themselves when a solicitor they had initially engaged went bankrupt before the 1st ever hearing.

It ended up an extremely good result all things considered.

 

The following recent High Court Case should serve as a reminder to peeps who may be relying too heavily on a properly executed Credit Agreement ever coming to light before SoLA becomes applicable, even after the Original Creditors have indicated that they do NOT possess one...

 

McGuffick v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc [2009] EWHC 2386 (Comm) (06 October 2009)

 

 

:)

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children.

And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers.

And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

(Jules Winnfield)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Milktrayman, yes, many thanks for the above links, will have a look at them. I had heard of the McGuffick case as someone recently lost in court when the judge brought that particular judgement up (saving the claimant's barrister from having to do his job) even though it was totally irrelevant in that particular case.

 

Nwest have issued a claim for around £18,000 (overdraft) and a huge chunk of that is made up of a charge card debt. The breakdown for the amounts charged each month didn't actually show on my bank statements, just the total amount debited, so I think Nwest should have to prove these amounts by providing the statements relevant to the charge card, as well as those for the current account (which I now have) and also any agreement that may exist, otherwise there is no proof that they are correct or justified. I do have other arguments for my defence, but just looking at ways to cast doubt on the charge card part of the debt, if I can do that.

 

£200 costs in the case you quote was a really good result wasn't it, I've been told by Nwest to expect in the region of £10,000, so not so good. How it can cost them that much, I really don't know.

 

Thanks for your help, Magda

Link to post
Share on other sites

One other question, if anyone can help, also being taken to court at the moment by Cabot. The accounts were in dispute and suddenly received court papers. I have got a thread, but just wondered if anyone knows the answer to this: Cabot has purchased two accounts, one ex MBNA credit card, the other was a loan with Hitachi Nova (DFS) so completely separate companies and totally unrelated. However, Cabot has lumped the two together as one claim, no breakdown of individual amounts on their POC (although I know what they claim the amounts are) just a total figure being claimed. Can they do this? where two agreements are entirely separate, lump them together as one claim. In effect, when I do the defence I will be defending two entirely separate claims with entirely different issues, even though they are lumped together as one. If it gets as far as court, then it is going to make it a lot more complicated at any hearing.

 

Many thanks, Magda

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Magda

 

My thinking is that you can get the claim set aside on grounds that it is falsely premised. Judges hate this cavalier approach to using their resources. If you get the judge on side he/she will be hopping mad at this sort of presumptious behaviour.

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks EIE, that's something worth looking at. I know that sometimes a credit card and overdraft are lumped together on a claim if it's for the same company (say for example Lloyds TSB bank) but these are completely unrelated and they don't even specify the individual amounts of each alleged debt.

 

regards, Magda

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Magda

 

My thinking is that you can get the claim set aside on grounds that it is falsely premised. Judges hate this cavalier approach to using their resources. If you get the judge on side he/she will be hopping mad at this sort of presumptious behaviour.

 

I disagree. Magda allegedly owes the money to one company, the company that purchased the debt. The fact that the total debt was purchased from two separate companies, I doubt is relevant. If they were taking action on behalf of those separate companies, then you might be right, but (presumably) Cabot are taking action on their own behalf.

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

 

Me vs Rockwell/Tessara/RBofS: pending.

Me vs MBNA/1st Crud: Discontinued.

First Direct Overdraft: CCJ won.

IR: 2 CCJs 1 won.

Birmingham Midshires: pending

BT: pending

others to come....

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The general defence of falsely premised is a good one because it allows you to attack from all angles when the judge asks why you think it is falsely premised. You start by demolishing their particulars of claim, move forward to questions of en forceable agreement and then finish with the UTCCRs. By the time you've done that you'll have the opposition solicitor begging for mercy. And remember that since it is falsely premised, they have vexatiously brought claim and should bear their own costs.

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair point animal magic, but then Magda is entitled to have properly detailed particulars of claim. Why would they conflate the two and is that not cause for challenging the veracity of the claim. It should be borne in mind that I have successfully challenged the entire claim in these circumstances. However it should also be borne in mind by Magda that this means nothing in her case.

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you asked Cabot for a notice of assignment. Or in this case two notices?

Keep the faith. EiE.

 

Capstone Mortgage 'Services' - Sub-prime garbage - unlawful behaviour/MULTIPLE consumer abuse, TOTALLY in Defiance of REGULATIONS and the law

 

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/gmac_rfc.pdf

 

CONTACT CIB Here

 

http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/Complaintformcib.Htm

 

Kevin Hughes(Compliance Manager-main) @ 02920 380 633

 

Lee Jenkins(prosecuting Amany Attia) 02920 380 643

 

Mark Youde(accounts compliance) 02920 380 955

 

Charlotte Allan @ 0207 596 6108 investigating all the Lehman lenders

 

Jeremy Pilcher 0207 637 6231

 

NO KAGGA LEFT BEHIND...

 

"We would not seek a battle, as we are; Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Cap1 & CCA return
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4021 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.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...