DCA with default CCJ

[Learnerlitigator]

How unexpected! CCA request was sent on 01.09 and delivered on 03.09 (10 working days so far). Today i get a letter: "Further to your recent correspondence and in order to process your communication further, we would request that you provide the following information by 22 sep 12 to assist us in resolving this matter."

 

"a photocopy of driving license, identity card, passport would assist us to progress the account accordingly" & "your assistance would be greatly appreciated. please note that this is not a demand but a request"

 

Above the sweet little template box is the account info, account purchased from, amount etc.

 

Firstly one wonders, are they not sort of admitting they are not sure that they are sending personal data to the person to whom it relates? Or, might they as well ask: would you 'please send us some real information to assist us in fabricating an instrument that gives us title to this debt from you?'.

 

They have banked my £1.00 cheque but seem to be suggesting that in order to fulfill their legal obligation to me they need further proof that I am the person that they say I am, and I say I am not, and they kindly extend their 12 + 2 working days.

 

Now should i even bother to respond with a little sarcasm or just let them default before sending them the default letter. I assume that as they have previously informed me that they have asked the OC for the CCA stuff and that I have informed them that I am NOT a past resident of the address they inquired about. They must have the agreement etc. discounted my reply to their address inquiry and with absolute certainly that they have the right of the matter decide to bugger about with this nonsense ID crap.

 

The final paragraphs of my CCA request went:

 

For the avoidance of doubt the OFT Guidelines state:

 

“You don't have to give any documentation to the debt collector. They must provide information to you to prove you owe the money.”

 

And as you have contacted me at the above address you are obliged to have satisfied yourself as to my identity using all possible means BEFORE demanding money from me and furnishing me with personal details regarding a debt.

Having regard for the above please do not waste my time by asking me to provide you with anything further to validate my name and/or address as I will not adjust the date for compliance accordingly.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The ICO seems not to consider a CCA as personal data, as they say the might expect an agreement to be supplied as part of SAR there is no obligation for the creditor to do so.

So why should you need to supply ID for a CCA request?

Tell the you are unable to aggree to their request.

[Learnerlitigator]

I have no idea, although I did request SAR at the same time (seperate letter) perhaps today's letter refers to that request and not the CCA request.

 

Either way, should I respond? The letter was from collection department, I'm sure I have read that there is no requirement to supply an ID in the ACT.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Learnerlitigator

[lookinforinfo]

I would tell them not to worry. if you are not the person that they took to Court last year, then they are already in serious trouble. So sending you the data you asked for earlier

won't affect the trouble they are already in. And if you are the right person, then no harm done. Oh yes, the clock is still ticking from the 3rd September..........................

just in case this was a stalling tactic.

[Learnerlitigator]

Good idea LFI, since Brig mentioned it I think he's probably on the right track it's more likely to be the SAR request than the CCA.

 

Does 12 working days + 2 mean they can be Saturdays or other non-working (bank) days x 2 or Xmas days? probably quite obvious but it just seems odd 12 + 2 working days rather than a straight forward 14 days.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

It's 12 + 2 to allow for weekends and bank hols so Monday -Friday 5+5 days + 2 working days.

[Learnerlitigator]

Thanks Brigadier, thought as much but doesn't hurt to confirm the meaning of a term used so frequently.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

No probs.

[Learnerlitigator]

I find it irresistible to have a little tease, I think I'll send them this:

 

account ref: @@@@@

Dear sir/madam,

I am in receipt of your letter dated *.*.12 and must advise you that I cannot accede to your request for ID documentation.

 

Our views differ of course in that you address me as XXX but my name is YYY the former being an informal address, and that you claim I owe a debt to you from ??? and I claim that I have never had an account with them, you ask me to confirm &&&& as a former address and I claim that it has never been an address of mine.

 

As stated in my original request I am not prepared to adjust the date for compliance to take account of further correspondence and therefore your date of ** September as a deadline for provision of ID is invalid.

I have no interest in threatening complaints to the relevant bodies in the event of your non-compliance of my statutory requests but I would like a copy of your complaints procedure as there are issues which I should wish addressed.

 

I should like to get through the formalities with as little difficulty as possible in order that we might reach a resolution, and I should like to point out that as you make a claim against me using this address in the name XXX and I am responding accordingly; you must have satisfied yourself as to my bona-fides. In short either you claim that the data relates to me at this address and places me at a liability to you or; you do not believe that it relates to me at this address in which case you would have no evidence to base your claim upon. There are therefore no reasonable grounds for you to request ID, the legislation does not require it other than that you comply with the regulations. I could not in any event supply ID in the name “XXX” as it is an informal address and my documentation reflects the name “YYY” and my current address differs from the one you claim belongs to the account as you already know.

[Learnerlitigator]

Okay as expected they defaulted my CCA request and I have today sent this:

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

Account ref:

Dear Sirs

You have defaulted on my request for a copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement pertaining to the above agreement, pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. And the account is now legally in dispute. Whilst the default continues you are unable to assign the account to any other party. Furthermore if the default remains for 30 days you commit an offence under the ACT. You will therefore cease ALL collection activity until you have rectified the default. You are reminded that under CPUTR 2008 it is an offence for you to mislead me into believing that you possess evidence of a contract knowing the same to be untrue. I will not hesitate to forward details of your conduct to the relevant authorities and/or seek such relief as I am entitled in the Civil Courts without further notification to you. You should be aware that the only proof acceptable to me must pass the legal definition of “STRICT PROOF”.

I am in receipt of your letter dated 13.09.12 and must advise you that I cannot accede to your request for ID documentation.

Our views differ of course in that you address me as E but my name is E+ the former being an informal address and that you claim I owe a debt to you from ** and I claim that I have never had an account with them, you ask me to confirm abcdef as a former address and I claim that it has never been an address of mine.

As stated in my original request I am not prepared to adjust the date for compliance to take account of further correspondence and therefore your date of 22 September as a deadline for provision of ID is invalid. The date prescribed for your compliance remains the 10th October 2012.

I request a copy of your complaints procedure as there are issues which I should wish addressed.

I should like to get through the formalities with as little difficulty as possible in order that we might reach a resolution, and I should like to point out that as you make a claim against me using this address in the name E and I am responding accordingly; you must have satisfied yourself as to my bona-fides. In short either you claim that the data relates to me at this address and places me at a liability to you or you do not believe that it relates to me at this address in which case you would have no evidence to base your claim upon. There should, therefore be no basis for you to request ID, the legislation does not require it other than that you comply with the regulations. I could not in any event supply ID in the name “E” as it is an informal address and my documentation reflects the name “E+” and my current address differs from the one you claim belongs to the account as you already know.

Your correspondence to date has, in my opinion been unprofessional in that you have written to me as a number of different departments rather than giving me a contact name within a defined department. If this tactic is designed to intimidate me or make me feel that you are unaware of the overall scope of my original letter, take heed that it is not working. It is your responsibility to ensure that my enquiries are disseminated to the relevant department(s).

 

I have no intention in wasting further postage costs on this matter and suggest that you confine your efforts to either complying with my legal requests or informing me that you have been erroneous in your tracing of Mr E in which case you must destroy all data relating to me and informing me in writing of such destruction in compliance of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Yours sincerely

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

There in no offence the was removed some cosiderable time ago, the sanction is that they cannot enforce the debt, it remains payable and normal requests for payment can continue.

[Learnerlitigator]

Okay thanks for that, nevertheless that's what they will be reading as it's been posted already. I'm NEVER going to pay something that they can't show me an agreement for and their "normal requests for payment" will be consigned to the Local Authority's recycling agents with the other spam mail. I take it they can now sell it on or register it with CRAs too or is that still not allowed?

[lookinforinfo]

With your "debt", they have already registered it with the CRAs. The account is still in dispute though so shouldn't be assigned.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

There is little one can do if they do sell or assign it anyway.

[Learnerlitigator]

Ah I see, then it's so old that it's already gone from CRA and i think I'm right in saying they can't default it again?

 

Also the CCJ issue has now been transferred to my local CC

[Learnerlitigator]

Silly me, I notice I've been CTRL C ing from old posts instead of reading the new templates. A cautionary note for others methinks!

[Learnerlitigator]

Have spoken with my Local Court and I am allowed to send in an amended statement which they will marry with my N244, Can anyone see anything I should add or remove from my post 45 please? (I've taken on board Andy's reply post 49). I want to get this away for Monday if possible.

[Learnerlitigator]

Does this make sense or would it be seen as inflammatory?

 

The applicant believes that if a liability does indeed exist that the claimant has failed to act in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in that he failed to issue default notice, termination notice, assignment notices etc. and has instead used the court to circumvent his responsibilities in that regard.

[lookinforinfo]

I don't think it is necessarily inflammatory but as you didn't receive notification of the Court case, they may have sent default, termination and assignment notices, it's just that

you didn't receive them. Perhaps you might be better waiting for the response to your sar and see if those notifications are included. If they are, you can look to see if they complied with the Act.

[Learnerlitigator]

That's a good call, thanks. I'll try a waiting game SAR is due in 3 weeks and court date will be 4 or 5 weeks so it'll be tight.

[Learnerlitigator]

Any point in contacting the DCA legal now I have notification of transfer for set-aside to try and get info from them relating to the CCJ or even agreement to setting aside the judgement? Or is the sleeping dogs option better?

[Learnerlitigator]

If Possible could site team review and comment for me. TY in advance

 

I don't want the DJ to chuck it out for the content

 

The red bit is omitted

 

Parp! i clicked the ! and me pdf disappeared[ATTACH=CONFIG]38490[/ATTACH]

Edited September 24, 2012 by Learnerlitigator

[Learnerlitigator]

Try again......

[MARTIN3030]

Where is the content you want looking at

[Learnerlitigator]

It's up now I think, can't tell as it's showing on my page.

Edited September 24, 2012 by Learnerlitigator