Cap1 & CCA return

[Mike220359]

My initial thought was that too Mike, but i can't help thinking the prescribed terms may differ for running- account credit.

 

Paul.

 

Nope it's exactly the same, and the reason why three of my settled accounts are tying themselves up in knots coz I'm reclaiming the interest from them that they've charged.

 

Mike

[Smoothy]

Nope it's exactly the same, and the reason why three of my settled accounts are tying themselves up in knots coz I'm reclaiming the interest from them that they've charged.

 

Mike

 

Whoaaa boy! Sorry to yank the handbrake up but can you clarify something for me Mike?

 

My interpretation of the last few posts is

 

If you have no credit limit stated on your agreement, it renders it

 

_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

 

Please fill in the blanks! Cause if it is what I think it is, then yeeeehar ..its payday!!

[un1boy]

Hi I am sorry I am being a bit one-sided with this thread at the mo, I will catch up with the last few posts later tonight - I am a but busy at the mo.

 

I have a question to ask really. I know we have covered this many times, but I issued a section 78 request ot to a DCA for an od account which they unlawfully defaulted. I have received a reply from them confirming it's a running account credit agreement which aren't covered under the CCA.

 

Now, because they have put this in writing, and runnign account is covered, do you think it would be worth me sending them a letter? i have drafted it, if anyone would like to see, let me know and I will either post it or email it!

 

cheers guys

[paulwlton]

Nope it's exactly the same, and the reason why three of my settled accounts are tying themselves up in knots coz I'm reclaiming the interest from them that they've charged.

 

Mike

 

Why just the interest have a read first paragraph.

http://www.wragge.com/files/HowMuchCredit_Mar2003.pdf

 

Paul

[m55dlc]

Hi I am sorry I am being a bit one-sided with this thread at the mo, I will catch up with the last few posts later tonight - I am a but busy at the mo.

 

I have a question to ask really. I know we have covered this many times, but I issued a section 78 request ot to a DCA for an od account which they unlawfully defaulted. I have received a reply from them confirming it's a running account credit agreement which aren't covered under the CCA.

 

Now, because they have put this in writing, and runnign account is covered, do you think it would be worth me sending them a letter? i have drafted it, if anyone would like to see, let me know and I will either post it or email it!

 

cheers guys

 

Erm, if they state the 'running account credit agreement' is not covered by the CCA, how can they default you under the CCA? Is it just me but it would sound like they've just contradicted themselves?

[un1boy]

Erm, if they state the 'running account credit agreement' is not covered by the CCA, how can they default you under the CCA? Is it just me but it would sound like they've just contradicted themselves?

 

My thoughts exactly - and then they reckon that I am liable for the agreemetn under the CCA regs....well, if it isn't covered by the CCA then how can it be covered by the regs?

[Mike220359]

Whoaaa boy! Sorry to yank the handbrake up but can you clarify something for me Mike?

 

My interpretation of the last few posts is

 

If you have no credit limit stated on your agreement, it renders it

 

_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

 

Please fill in the blanks! Cause if it is what I think it is, then yeeeehar ..its payday!!

 

I'm a little confused by the post, but I think the gist is, no credit limit, not prperly executed.

 

I'm sitting at the computer now with a copy of an 'agreement' that was alleged to be in operation between me and 'a bank' for a credit card.

 

Lets take it one step at a time, at the top it says Credit Agreement regulated by the CCA 1974', by inference therefore it should adhere to all that is required under that act.

 

1.There is no rate of interest on the sheet, it says in the small print that the rate of interest will be determined after my applcation has been approved.

 

2. There is no credit limit set, once again it says in the small print that the rate of interest will be determined after my applcation has been approved.

 

These are prescribed terms and must be in place above the signature to indicate that the information is readily available to the customer before he signs it and not on another document. If you read the OFTs guidlines on the agreement layout that a couple of people have linked to in this thread, you will see this in black & white.

 

In box 12 of the agreement it goes on to say that

• we will use CRAs to help consider your application.
  
• if you do not qualify for a Gold Card, ..... we may give you a standard card (which is also covered by this agreement) This alludes to that fact that it is indeed an application and not an agreement, in addition the substitution of another 'end product' (if this was an agreement) would be in breech of section 59
  
• and the most damning piece of all is just above the signature box it says quite clearly, please sign and return your application
  
• In addition the box is signed by someone at the bank, but not dated, so is executed on that point I do't know.

So there you have it, I have an agreement that is also an application, but an agreement that does not conform to what is required, that is whty I'm getting my interest back, charges refunded and the data removed from the CRAs

 

Mike

[Mike220359]

Why just the interest have a read first paragraph.

http://www.wragge.com/files/HowMuchCredit_Mar2003.pdf

 

Paul

 

Thanks for that Paul, I'm claiming for damages under the DPA, but I'll have a good shuffty at that one.

 

MIke

[Guest Battleaxe]

Got this in the mail this morning

 

Following is the Agreement, funny thing when I took out this account and another one I lived at a different address, the agreement shows our current address, what else is missing?

 

Blind Harry can see the printing on the contract isn't mine. I was hoping for the signature to be scanned in, as I got Kent to sign the CCA requests.

[Mike220359]

Hi I am sorry I am being a bit one-sided with this thread at the mo, I will catch up with the last few posts later tonight - I am a but busy at the mo.

 

I have a question to ask really. I know we have covered this many times, but I issued a section 78 request ot to a DCA for an od account which they unlawfully defaulted. I have received a reply from them confirming it's a running account credit agreement which aren't covered under the CCA.

 

Now, because they have put this in writing, and runnign account is covered, do you think it would be worth me sending them a letter? i have drafted it, if anyone would like to see, let me know and I will either post it or email it!

 

cheers guys

 

What the devil are they talking about a running account credit agreemnt is covered by the CCA. An overdraft may be but if it isn't then they can't use any of the penalties i.e defaults.

 

Mike

[InKogneeToh]

many agreements are signed by the debtor first.?

 

Yes i have had those a blank piese of paper with a sig box at the bottom with a note attached saying just sign we wil fil the rest in later.

 

Peter

 

Hi Peter

 

I really do not want to ruffle anyone's feathers so I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

With regard to your post above, no-one in their right mind would sign a blank piece of paper but if they did the CCA covers this by s62/63 - a copy has to be given to the borrower there and then. So if there is any dispute, he has the original!

 

Regards, Pam

[Smoothy]

I'm a little confused by the post, but I think the gist is, no credit limit, not prperly executed.

 

I'm sitting at the computer now with a copy of an 'agreement' that was alleged to be in operation between me and 'a bank' for a credit card.

 

Lets take it one step at a time, at the top it says Credit Agreement regulated by the CCA 1974', by inference therefore it should adhere to all that is required under that act.

 

1.There is no rate of interest on the sheet, it says in the small print that the rate of interest will be determined after my applcation has been approved.

 

2. There is no credit limit set, once again it says in the small print that the rate of interest will be determined after my applcation has been approved.

 

These are prescribed terms and must be in place above the signature to indicate that the information is readily available to the customer before he signs it and not on another document. If you read the OFTs guidlines on the agreement layout that a couple of people have linked to in this thread, you will see this in black & white.

 

In box 12 of the agreement it goes on to say that

• we will use CRAs to help consider your application.
  
• if you do not qualify for a Gold Card, ..... we may give you a standard card (which is also covered by this agreement) This alludes to that fact that it is indeed an application and not an agreement, in addition the substitution of another 'end product' (if this was an agreement) would be in breech of section 59
  
• and the most damning piece of all is just above the signature box it says quite clearly, please sign and return your application
  
• In addition the box is signed by someone at the bank, but not dated, so is executed on that point I do't know.

So there you have it, I have an agreement that is also an application, but an agreement that does not conform to what is required, that is whty I'm getting my interest back, charges refunded and the data removed from the CRAs

 

Mike

Thanks Mike. That explained it all succinctly and clearly. That was the question I wanted answered. No credit limit or intrest rate + non executed agreement= UN-ENFORCEABLE!!

Sorry for seeming an idiot, its just my interpretation is generally the wrong one!

But what a wealth of info......

>rushes off to check all agreeements comply

[Mike220359]

Thanks Mike. That explained it all succinctly and clearly. That was the question I wanted answered. No credit limit or intrest rate + non executed agreement= UN-ENFORCEABLE!!

Sorry for seeming an idiot, its just my interpretation is generally the wrong one!

But what a wealth of info......

>rushes off to check all agreeements comply

 

No problem mate

[paulwlton]

No problem mate

 

 

Mike have you a link to the Consumer Contract Reulations 1983, can't seem to find it anywhere.

 

Paul

[un1boy]

What the devil are they talking about a running account credit agreemnt is covered by the CCA. An overdraft may be but if it isn't then they can't use any of the penalties i.e defaults.

 

Mike

 

I know, I know - do you want to check ove rmy letter I want to send back to them?

[InKogneeToh]

Hi all

 

Re: credit limits on credit cards:

 

3.10 How should the credit limit be expressed?

 

Sch 1 para 8 requires a statement of the credit limit under a running-account credit agreement. This must appear as part of ‘Key Financial Information’.

 

The credit limit may be expressed as one of the following:

• a sum of money;

 

• a statement that the credit limit will be determined by the creditor from time to time and notified to the debtor;

 

• a sum of money together with a statement that the creditor may vary the credit limit from time to time and notify the debtor;

 

• a statement indicating the manner in which the credit limit will be determined and that notice of it will be given to the debtor; or

 

• a statement indicating that there is no credit limit.

It does not therefore need to be expressed as a sum of money, although the OFT would encourage this in the interests of transparency.

 

The Office of Fair Trading Consumer Credit (Agreements etc) Regs draft FAQs 36

 

 

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news!

 

Regards, Pam

[Smoothy]

But if thats the case, how would you know what your credit limit is if you dont receive notification, and therefore unaware that you may have breached t&c's by exceeding it then getting a default and not knowing wether all of this is lawful/enforceable?

[InKogneeToh]

Hi Smoothy

 

The regulations apply to the form and content of the agreement. The card issuer normally notifies you of your initial credit limit when they send the card.

 

Regards, Pam

[Smoothy]

Hi Smoothy

 

The regulations apply to the form and content of the agreement. The card issuer normally notifies you of your initial credit limit when they send the card.

 

Regards, Pam

 

I know what your saying Pam, but my point is, if its to be sent on a separate piece of paper, surely its your word against theirs that you received it and if you didnt receive it, they have the opportunity to alter it in their favour. Not that I would dare to assume that these marvelous financial institutions that have put the Great into Britain would stoop so low as to commit fraud........

[Guest The Terminator]

I totally agree and this is a path that I am going down with three accounts that have been settled. The 1988 regulations on th content of agreements and the OFT guidlines are very prescriptive in what needs to be included in the content of agreements. Just because the sheet of paper that you sign is headed ''Agreement'' doesn't mean Jack if it doesn't contain the prescribed terms.

 

Three of my old creditors in accounts now closed and settled are squirming

because not only have they charged interest when they shouldn't have, added fees when they shouldn't have, but of equal importance disseminated my data and undertaken searches when they shouldn't have.

 

I think that this is the ticking time bomb that Tam & Term are thinking about, am I wrong lads!

 

Mike

 

I'll PM you later.

[InKogneeToh]

I know what your saying Pam, but my point is, if its to be sent on a separate piece of paper, surely its your word against theirs that you received it and if you didnt receive it, they have the opportunity to alter it in their favour. Not that I would dare to assume that these marvelous financial institutions that have put the Great into Britain would stoop so low as to commit fraud........

 

The credit limit is a variable anyway and the creditor can increase/decrease at any time upon giving of notice.

 

I think you may be confusing this issue with an agreement for a loan where the money is given to you up front.

 

The credit limit only determines the total amount that you may spend if you want to. It doesn't indicate that you have committed to paying back that sum.

 

Regards, Pam

[Guest The Terminator]

we will use CRAs to help consider your application.

 

 

Mike: Do's that not breach the DPA for starters for example your permission.

[un1boy]

The credit limit is a variable anyway and the creditor can increase/decrease at any time upon giving of notice.

 

I think you may be confusing this issue with an agreement for a loan where the money is given to you up front.

 

The credit limit only determines the total amount that you may spend if you want to. It doesn't indicate that you have committed to paying back that sum.

 

Regards, Pam

 

In my view it is still credit though - always there, on demand, to borrow whenever you need to and it will be paid back because you normally only get one if you have regular deposits like wages, student loan etc.....

[un1boy]

Mike: Do's that not breach the Data Protection Act for starters for example your permission.

 

Possibly Term, but hasn't the Information Commissioners Office said that permission isn't needed now? So long as at least one of the paragraphs of sched 2 is met?

 

(not that I agree with it becasue I do not at all - they should only be able to process our data with our permission!)

[Guest The Terminator]

Got this in the mail this morning

 

Following is the Agreement, funny thing when I took out this account and another one I lived at a different address, the agreement shows our current address, what else is missing?

 

Blind Harry can see the printing on the contract isn't mine. I was hoping for the signature to be scanned in, as I got Kent to sign the CCA requests.

 

Hi BA That is not a true copy and not a very good cut and paste job either.The writer of that letter really needs to go back to law school because he is incorrect in what his quoted.S77/78 spell it out quite clearly a true copy of the executed agreement.