Experto/Varde now Arrow/Shoos Claimform - old MBNA card debt

[roygoodbeat]

Just a bit of advice.

 

After MBNA sold the debt onto experto during the during the default notice period, I have since been requesting proof of sale from both parties. I have also written to mbna accepting their unlawful rescession of the agreement.

 

They have denied it and stated that the debt had been identified for sale prior to the default notice and was sold after this. Experto verbally stated that this was sold to them prior to the default notice and wrote during the default notice period.

 

Please read earlier on this forum which shows the dates. The default notice was also incorrect.

 

I have made a subject access request to Experto, but they have hardly sent anything. After I last wrote to them demanding proof of sale and requesting that they send all the requested info, MBNA have since written stating that the account has been assigned to Experto. I then get another letter from Experto stating that they have purchased the account from MBNA.

 

Are they trying to cover their tracks and what can I do about it. Fed up with the treatening calls, lack of co-operation, not responding to my lawful requests and MBNA/ Experto playing their games.

[pumpytums]

Hi Roy,

did Exspurto actually say that they own the account, did they put this in writing?

 

Pumpytums

[roygoodbeat]

Like they wrote in October, they wrote yesterday to say that they had bought the interest of MBNA.

[pumpytums]

Did they just say they were acting for Varde again then?

 

Pumpytums

[roygoodbeat]

It says

 

" We are writing to advise you that Varde Investments (Ireland) Limited has bought the interest of MBNA Europe Bank Limited in the above referenced account, including the outstanding balance. Consequently, Varde Investments (Ireland) Limited are now the legal owner of your account.

 

Under the terms of this assignment, Experto Credite Ltd have been appointed by Varde Investments (Ireland) to recover any and all outstanding amounts"

 

This is the same notice I received dated 13th October 2009. The default notice was issued on the 9th October 2009 by MBNA.

 

I have a screen shot showing that experto had this on their system on the 30th September 2009.

[roygoodbeat]

In response to this I received the following today:

 

You have contacted me once again regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself to you.

 

I am familiar with the CPUTR 2008 and the Office of Fair Trading's Guidance on debt collection, which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

 

I would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. AND in not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive and unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

 

I would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my liability for the debt in question and that you are in fact the legal owners of the alleged debt. It is not unreasonable for someone to request proof of this and your reluctance to provide this leads me to believe that you are attempting to demand money that you are not legally entitled to. I have requested this on a number of occasions, specifically proof of ownership.

 

I refer to my letter dated 13th February 2010 and my subject access request, a copy of which is attached. First you acknowledge receipt of this and now you deny that you have ever received this. This was signed for by yourselves on the 15th February and this constitutes proof of receipt in law. During a recent conversation you requested that I send another payment of £10. This has been already sent to you and you have failed to send all the information requested and therefore have committed an offense. I require that you send everything that has been requested including statements, deed of assignment and any proof of sale to you, including confirmation of dates that you acquired the alleged debt.

 

I await this information or I require your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to Trading Standards and also inform the Office of Fair Trading of your actions.

 

I would also once again remind you that I require all communication in writing only. I have repeated asked you not to call myself and yet you continue to ignore my lawful request. I will not tolerate threats over the phone from any of your staff or anyone speaking to myself in an aggressive tone. I have attempted to find a solution in this matter but you continue to act unhelpfully or lawfully with my legal requests. You have continued to delay this and any further breaches made by you may result in legal action being taken against to you. Any costs involved would be sought against yourselves.

 

The reply was from experto

 

I write to confirm receipt of your letter dated **** the contencts of which have been noted and in repsonse.

 

Your second paragraph quotes the OFT "it is unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question".

 

Can I take it that you are not claiming to be ******** that signed the credit agreement in 1994.

 

Should this be the case, we are not in a position to supply any information to you if there is a suggection that this matter was taken out fraudulently by a third party. To do so would breech Data Protection. However, for the following reasons I am satisfied you and the signatory are one of the same:

 

Signature provided matches the that of the specimen cheque (photocopied to a letter dated 13th Febuary 2010) This was my subject access request that they signed for, received, acknowledged, then denied ever receiving.

 

The same letter states (I have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to yourselves or MBNA. However on page 2 you readily admit to the wrong doing and mishamdiling of my account.

 

If- as you maintain, you are not liable for this matter, I invite you to report this to your local police station as fraud.

 

I have made the decision not to supply you with any further information, at your reference of a possbile fraud. I look forward to receiving your response with a generated crime refernce number from your local police.

Finally, I question an individuals ability to dispute a matter (which has been detailed) taht does not actually concern the individual who has no alleged liabilty.

 

Any advice??? The person who signed this is the same unhelpful person who I spoke to recently who was very rude and would not listen.

 

I am fed up with this company, MBNA and this person as they are trying to bend the rules and law.

 

Looks like they are refusing to honour my subject access request and will not produce any documents. Furthermore neither them or MBNA will give me the exact arrears whebn they unlawfully rescended my agreement.

 

Any ideas on a reply??

[Dotty50]

Hi Roy,

 

Seems like a stalemate situation, I don't really know what to suggest really but would mind seeing what others think, as I too expect to be in a similar position with these people.

 

Not the best day to get answers on here with the changes to the website today, but at least it will give your thread a bump

[Dotty50]

Hi Roy,

 

Seems like a stalemate situation, I don't really know what to suggest really but would mind seeing what others think, as I too expect to be in a similar position with these people.

 

Not the best day to get answers on here with the changes to the website today, but at least it will give your thread a bump

[roygoodbeat]

Hi Roy,

 

Seems like a stalemate situation, I don't really know what to suggest really but would mind seeing what others think, as I too expect to be in a similar position with these people.

 

Not the best day to get answers on here with the changes to the website today, but at least it will give your thread a bump

 

I agree.

 

They are refusing to act on my subject access request and despite signing for this and receiving this, they now are ignoring this. I have checked and they have not banked my £10 which they received and signed for. MBNA did a similar tactic when I approached them in April last year.

 

MBNA and they are refusing to advise me of the arrears at the time of the default, the max I am now liable for.

 

They are refusing to give proof of ownership and do not want to co-operate.

 

MBNA just write and request that it is with Experito now and to write to them.

[Dotty50]

I can't edit my previous post but obviously I meant that I wouldn't mind seeing what other people thought about this.

 

Your not the first I have read where MBNA are dragging their heels on SAR. It could be that they have realised what they have done wrong with selling on before expiry of possibly faulty DNs' and don't want to give you the proof of this, which would be within their logs!

 

I think you now have to complain to the ICO in order to force MBNA's hand.

[slick132]

Hi RGB,

 

It certainly looks like a stalemate where, in the last letter to you, they are twisting your comments so they can then hide behind Data Protection laws.

 

If you want to get a full SAR response, approach the ICO if you have time to spare. If you want a faster response and think something useful may be shown in a SAR response, start court action. See Article 20 or thereabouts in the Bank Templates Library.

 

This will not normally get you sight of the credit agreement.

 

On the other hand, you could just ignore the demands and phone calls. If they want to take court action for the account, they will then HAVE to produce the credit agreement if, in fact, they have it.

[roygoodbeat]

I wil write to the ICO, not that it does any good if I have to go to court over it. When it comes to court judges do not take any notice that the card company have broken the rules.

[roygoodbeat]

Need some quick advice.

 

I have an MBNA agree- Ex HBOS- that has an invalid default notice. To start with it does not give the correct timescales to rectify the breach and secondly it shows the full balance, not the amount outstanding at the time of the default.

 

Is this unlawful termination or unlawfully recended.

 

I have a second agreement ex Morgan Stanley with the same above, but they sold during the default period.

[roygoodbeat]

I have found some of my old statements and I now have a clear picture of events:

 

29th April- MBNA signed for my subject access request. This was sent outside the 40 day period in August. MBNA broke the sixth principle of the Data Protection Act.

1st July- MBNA went into dispute by not replying to my section 77/78 request. They wrote a week later saying that they

could not retrieve the docments. It was not until the 27th Septmebr, I received a front copy of the agreement. No T&C's.

27th July- Statatory Notice served on MBNA under section 10 of Data Protection Act giving them 14 days. Never had a reply and they continued to process data and pass onto other parties.

 

Now the history of the default notice.

 

On statement 21st Sep, Arrears were £1062.66 with balance about £10,321

 

9th October Default Notice sent for toal amount of £10,321, not the arrears, to be paid by 26th October.

 

A letter dated 23rd October was sent by Experto saying that the debt had been sold to varde and they had been appointed. Were demanding the full amount.

 

I have had a screen print from Experto and it states the 30th Sep it was up loaded unto their system. One of their staff said that they would have been sold the debt between the 30th Sep and the time the letter was sent to me.

 

On my MBNA Statements they show:

 

21Oct- Charge of Adjustment on the 30th Sep 09 brings the balance to 0.

 

but on the next statement.

 

28th Oct- States balance from prev statement is £10,321 and on the 19th Oct it states: Zero charge on Sold Account. bringing the balance to 0

 

I have written to MBNA accepting the unlawful recession. They wrote back and stated that it was not unlawful recession and that they account was identified in Mid October and only sold on the 31st October. This contridicts the info and evidence I have.

 

Hopefully this all makes sense. Can anyone give me an idea what I am liable for. From what I understand, as the default notice was invalid, it is only the arrears I am liable for.

 

This is also less Interest Charges (Is that from the 1st of July went the account went into dispute)

 

Less any unlawful charges (Only £72 after the 1st July) plus £94 before this date.

 

I understand that I can claim against unlawful reccession. Does this also apply to the breach in my Subject Access Request, Section 10 of Data Protection Act, their breach of my section 77/78 request and refusal to remove my telephone number from their system?

 

In addition, Experto refuse to stop calling me, send me all the documents that I have made under another Subject Access Request and keep harressing me?

 

Can anyone give me an idea of what I could expect (Guide to average amounts I can claim) what I can do and am I right in all this?

 

Thanks

 

(I want to nail this and prepare myself)

[roygoodbeat]

I have had an on going problem with MBNA and Experto. To cut a long story short, here is a brief guide to the breakdown:

 

I have found some of my old statements and I now have a clear picture of events:

 

29th April-

MBNA

signed for my Subject access request

. This was sent outside the 40 day period in August. MBNA broke the sixth principle of the Data Protection Act.

1st July- MBNA went into dispute by not replying to my section 77/78 request. They wrote a week later saying that they could not retrieve the docments. It was not until the 27th Septmebr, I received a front copy of the agreement. No T&C's.

27th July- Statatory Notice served on MBNA under section 10 of Data Protection Act giving them 14 days. Never had a reply and they continued to process data and pass onto other parties.

 

Now the history of the default notice.

 

On statement 21st Sep, Arrears were £1062.66 with balance about £10,321

 

9th October Default Notice sent for toal amount of £10,321, not the arrears, to be paid by 26th October.

 

A letter dated 23rd October was sent by Experto saying that the debt had been sold to varde and they had been appointed. Were demanding the full amount.

 

I have had a screen print from Experto and it states the 30th Sep it was up loaded unto their system. One of their staff said that they would have been sold the debt between the 30th Sep and the time the letter was sent to me.

 

On my MBNA Statements they show:

 

21Oct- Charge of Adjustment on the 30th Sep 09 brings the balance to 0.

 

but on the next statement.

 

28th Oct- States balance from prev statement is £10,321 and on the 19th Oct it states: Zero charge on Sold Account. bringing the balance to 0

 

I have written to MBNA accepting the unlawful recession. They wrote back and stated that it was not unlawful recession and that they account was identified in Mid October and only sold on the 31st October. This contridicts the info and evidence I have.

 

Hopefully this all makes sense. Can anyone give me an idea what I am liable for. From what I understand, as the default notice was invalid, it is only the arrears I am liable for.

 

This is also less interest

Charges (Is that from the 1st of July went the account went into dispute)

 

Less any unlawful charges (Only £72 after the 1st July) plus £94 before this date.

 

I understand that I can claim against unlawful reccession. Does this also apply to the breach in my Subject access request

, Section 10 of Data Protection Act, their breach of my section 77/78 request and refusal to remove my telephone number from their system?

 

In addition, Experto refuse to stop calling me, send me all the documents that I have made under another Subject Access Request and keep harressing me?

 

Can anyone give me an idea of what I could expect (Guide to average amounts I can claim) what I can do and am I right in all this?

 

Thanks

 

(I want to nail this and prepare myself)

[diddydicky]

no creditor has ever., to my knowledge written back in response to an unlawful repuddation acceptance and admitted that it is wrong!

 

A Dn claiming the full account balance in order to remedy it is as near to a 100% defective DN as one is ever going to get- as it would be impossible for the debtor to lawfully comply with it

 

sit back and do nothing

 

wait for any service of legal proceedings but dont hold your breath- as they will, i suspect never materialise

 

buy yourself a truecall if you can afford one

 

print off a few c opies of a standard "go on sucker make my day" responses to debt collectors and then sit back and marlk a date . 6 years from your last payment- on your diary

[vint1954]

They made a lot of mistakes on DN's around this date. I have one.

 

When you request a copy, the defect of 100% demand will be rectified.

 

With both documents in your hand, it could be very persuasive in ridiculing all of their reconstructions!

 

Vint

[roygoodbeat]

The person with whom I have spoken to Experto is very rude and unwilling to comply with my subject access request. My last letter stated that unless they can provide proof of ownership and compliance with my subject access request, I will not write to them further.

 

Surely if they reproduce a corrected default notice, this is against the law and is possibly fraudulant?

 

I know that if a judge accepts the unlawful rescession of the account, what can I claim against them in terms of costs?

[reignoffire]

Bump.

Can anyone else advise?

I'm in exactly the same position with a similar timeline and accounts sold around about the same time.

I wrote to MBNA re unlawful recession and got a voicemail and letter from a chap called I*n H*nter.

[roygoodbeat]

Haven't got my file with me but is that the same I*n H*nter from Experto?

[reignoffire]

I believe it is. He's the head honcho so my letter's obviously got their attention. The voicemail he left wen along the lines of ' I know you've cut and pasted from the internet and I'm not sure what you're requesting - please call me back to discuss' . Yeah right! He responded with a 'we're requesting the information you wanted' type letter so I'm giving them a reasonable amount of time before the next stage. I'll post the doc's when I get home.

[roygoodbeat]

Without prejudice

 

Sounds like the same guy who has left me messages and with whom I have spoken. The person is very rude and arrogant. Started spouting the Waksman ruling and that I had to pay. I advised him that they had not sent all the information requested from my subject access request. He denied receiving it despite proof of postage, and his staff stating that they had it. I ended up hanging up on him due to his threatening behaviour.

 

I wrote to him asking for proof of ownership and confirmation of when the alleged debt was sold. I also enclosed the proof of postage and receipt (by Recorded)

 

He wrote back stating that he would not comply with my subject access request. He also dismissed the proof of receipt and copy of original letter.

 

I have written back advising them that it has been noted that they are refusing to comply with the law and that I will not write or speak to them again until such proof has been sent.

 

Waiting to hear from them.

[roygoodbeat]

And now after hissing down the phone at me denying that they had ever received my subject access request and refusing to send me the details (After initially signing for it and saying they had it) I now get a letter saying, we acknowledge you have sent it and will send out the information in due course. The request was made in February.

 

 

I suspect they are going to try another tactic, probally send me partital info, then say they have sent all of it, now pay up...

 

I don't think so. I have more than a claim against them if it came to court.

[roygoodbeat]

And then out of the blue, MBNA write with my section 78 request made in June 2009. They stated that this is incomplete and they will not take any court action at this time. Only when they have retreived all the info. They also stated that payments should continue to be paid as per Carey V HSBC case.

The current credit agreement they have sent only has my address on it and the 'original credit agreement' is an illegible photo copy of an application form, not containing the prescribed t&c's.

 

This account is still in dispute as they have unlawfully terminated the agreement due to an invalid default notice. As far as I am concerned I am only liable for the arrears at the time, which they have said is the full amount on the default noticed, less unlawful charges and claim for unlawful termination.

 

Any suggestions on what to reply? Does the OFT guildlines still apply on debt collection if the account is clearly in dispute?

 

 

 

Any suggestions to write back.

[roygoodbeat]

At long last Experto have sent my Subject Access Request, however, all they have supplied is computer printouts from their call log and what they are calling a deed of assignment from MBNA (Which has never been received)

 

Perhaps people can give me advice on this. They state that this is all they have on file for me:

 

1) Call Log- This starts from November 2009, however, they have had the account since 30th September. From a previuos request, they sent another call log dated from this date. It now appears that this is now missing. The default date was 30th Sep and the letter from experto came in between the default date and remedy by. Also I have noticed they have tried to work out the equity in my home and marked it on the log.

2) The deed of assignment is on a MBNA paper. It reads:

 

Account Number: XXX

Customers Full Name: XXX

Last Known Address: XXX

Date Account Opened: date in 1994

Default Date: 30th Sep 2009

Assigned Balance: £xxx

Agreement Type: Credit Card

 

Dear Sir/ Madam

 

We confirm that the balance outstanding under the following account has now been assigned to Varde Investments, address in Ireland.

 

In accordance with the aforementioned assignment to Varde Investments Ltd, now holds all legal rights, authorities and obligations to the same.

 

Yours Faithfully

 

XXXX

 

That's all it reads. Looks like a cover letter, not dated.

 

Can anyone tell me what it should contain?

 

In terms of the subject access request, they still have not confirmed the date they purchased the debt despite a number of requests, plus there is very little information. I have the front copy of the original application from beneficical bank, but nothing that complies with the Waksman ruling or the OFT guidelines on what should be suppled under a section 78.

 

Any advice on what to write back? The outstanding balance of the default should have been about £934, not the full amount outstanding. I have written and accepted the unlawful rescession of the agreement.

 

Thanks in advance