Capital One anyone heard of BWlegal - Statutory Demand Received

[carriesue]

Received this reply from Capital after requesting CCA, non compliance and account in dispute letters to them

 

Quote

 

Please find enclosed a copy of your credit agreement as requested.

 

In accordance with Section78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copy Documents) Regulations 1983,

this is your origianl agreement,

and if any terms have been varied,

then the copy agreement will include the updated terms.

 

In addition, your personal details,

the signature box,

signature and date of signature have been omitted from the copy provided as permitted under Regulation 3 of the Consumer Credit

[Cancellation Notices and Copy Documents} Regulations 1983.

 

Under section 788 we are not required to provide a copy of the default notice and statement of default.

 

However, we can comfirm that a statement of default was issued on 16th December 2008

 

Unquote

 

What do I do next and do I still continue to send them token payments.

Many Thanks

Edited May 26, 2009 by carriesue

[Stubie]

Received this reply from Capital after requesting CCA, non compliance and account in dispute letters to them

Quote

Please find enclosed a copy of your credit agreement as requested. In accordance with Section78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copy Documents) Regulations 1983, this is your origianl agreement, and if any terms have been varied, then the copy agreement will include the updated terms. In addition, your personal details, the signature box, signature and date of signature have been omitted from the copy provided as permitted under Regulation 3 of the Consumer Credit [Cancellation Notices and Copy Documents} Regulations 1983.

Under section 788 we are not required to provide a copy of the default notice and statement of default.However, we can comfirm that a statement of default was issued on 16th December 2008

Unquote

What do I do next and do I still continue to send them token payments.

Many Thanks

 

I think the clue is in the wording:

 

The act requires a true copy of the executed agreement - the one you signed. As they have confirmed thast the copy provided has been amended, it cannot be a true copy.

 

You may also find that they acknowledge receipt of your request for a copy of your executed agreement, but then confirm that the copy provided is a copy of your current agreement or regulated agreement - they deliberately avoid referring to it as the executed agreement - fencing with words, in effect.

 

This is a standard letter and I, like many others here, have the same letter apart from personal details.

 

I wrote back pointing out the inconsistencies in the letter and confirming that they have still failed to provide a copy of the executed agreement. If the agreement has been updated then it cannot be a true copy of the executed agreement. They are still in default etc etc.

 

As to the token payments, that is a choice for you. Since the agreement is still in default, you are not obliged to pay, and they cannot enforce. In court they would still have to produce the original or there would be no way of confirming that this is a true copy - it could only be done by comparison.

 

I haven't received a reply to my letter, I will post it when I do but these letters are just generic mailers and part of Cap 1's game of chess to avoid producing the original document. I'm not paying them at the moment so am waiting for the next stage of escalation.

 

Hope this helps

 

Stubie

 

P.S. Keep the letter as it could be useful in the event that they try to enforce based on the claim that this is an executed agreement. This letter casts doubt upon the provenence of such a claim.

Edited May 27, 2009 by Stubie
added PS

[carriesue]

In April I requested a CCA and received T&C's.

I then sent an Account In Dispute letter.

 

Today I have received a letter from Capital informing me that my account has been sold to Lowell Portfolio on 14/08/09.

 

Also received in the same envelope a letter from Lowell to recover the outstanding balance or enter into a repayment plan.

 

I would appreciate any assistance in who to reply to and if there is a template I could use.

 

Thankyou

[maroondevo52]

Hi, carriesue.

 

Send Lowell this......................

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/574-letter-when-account-has-been-passed-on-whilst-agreement-request-is-in-dispute

 

Regards.

 

Scott.

[Desperate Daniella]

Capone have obviously just sent a job lot to Lowells. I got the same letter this morning and have told them to go away.

 

Follow Scott's advice above.

 

DDxxx

[carriesue]

Today I received a festive Christmas Gift offer from Lowells!

 

.Card states that if I make a payment towards my debt and set up monthy repayments I can claim '12 great gifts to the value of £200 -£300 and a hamper as well!'.

Nice of them!

I am still awaiting a reply to my previous correspondence after they sent me a reconstituted CCA..

[padja]

looks like all the caggers are getting them I await mine with bated breath

[carriesue]

Received two more letters from Red

stating that I have not replied to them (I have stating that the CCA was reconstituted)

then Hamptons got involved threatening to send bailiffs etc.

 

Now I have received a letter from Lowells stating that I should direct my dispute with Capital One

and to forward Lowells and Red a copy of the CCA request for their review.

 

Do I correspond with all three of them?

 

This has been going on since 2009.

 

Many Thanks

[dx100uk]

does this debt show on your CRA file?

 

dx

[citizenB]

Red is part of Lowells as are Hampton Legal

[citizenB]

Hampton are misleading you - unless and until they take you to court, win and obtain judgment.. they cannot simply send in the bailiffs.

 

If the letter you were sent implies that, then PLEASE, send it to the OFT and complain.

[dx100uk]

three threads merged

please keep to one thread per debt

for advise and history sake.

 

dx

[carriesue]

On 1/2 I received a letter from Lowells stating that the had put my account on hold for 28days after I had written to them regarding a reconstituted CCA that I had received. They advised me to contact Cap One and raise the issue with them along with sending Lowells the CCA documentation.

Letter dated 23/2 from Lowells headlining 'Great news you may not have council tax or water rates to pay as uring the months of Feb/March there is no council tax or water rates to pay as these are billed from April. to Jan and therefore the average person is better off by £150. Therfore a perfect time to get my Lowell account in order! If I do not come to an arrangement thy will use the county court to recover the balance.

Any advice of what to do next please. I first requested a CCA in April 2009 .

Many Thanks

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

What a bunch of wasters Lowells are, did they they

will go to court or they may????

What exactly does the recon consist of??

Exactly how old is this debt and when was the last

payment or written acknowledgment made??

How can they no if you pay CT anyway.

If they want documents they should get them

themselves.

[carriesue]

Last payment was made to Capital August 2006. Notice of default 13/11/2008.S

[carriesue]

I wrote to Lowells stating that since they had bought the debt they were responible for getting a copy of the CCA that was sent to me which did not have the prescribed t&c's etc. Yet another letter from Lowell's saying they were prepared to put my account on hold for 28 days to allow me th opportuntity to raise the issue with Cap One. Also they requested YET again that I forward a copy of the documentation purporting to be the CCA Cap One sent to me.

I really do not understand if Lowells bought the debt , why do I have to chase Cap One for info.

Any help with this please

[victoria_siempre]

Hi cs

 

"

43 Regulation 36 of the EU Directive Regulations.

16. ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHTS

here any rights of a creditor under a consumer credit agreement (for example the right to be repaid the money) are sold or transferred to a third party, notice of that assignment must be given to the borrower as soon as reasonably possible, except in the circumstances described below. This requirement applies to all regulated consumer credit agreements other than agreements secured on land. This requirement is in new section 82A of the CCA43.

 

t is the responsibility of the assignee (the creditor acquiring the rights) to ensure that notice is given. However, he does not have to give notice himself, but can agree with the assignor (the creditor assigning the rights) that the assignor will give notice instead, depending on what is more sensible in the circumstances. It is important, however, that notice is given as soon as reasonably possible and in a way that is clearly understandable by the borrower.

 

otice does not have to be given where arrangements for servicing the credit are unchanged as far as the borrower is concerned. For example, if Creditor A sells his rights under a credit agreement to Creditor B but Creditor A still collects the borrower’s repayments in the same way and is the only point of contact for the borrower on matters regarding the agreement, notice does not have to be given.

 

here notice has not been given, and arrangements for servicing the credit do subsequently change, the borrower must be informed of the assignment on or before the date that change happens. Again, this must be readily comprehensible to the borrower.

 

The definition of “creditor” in section 189 of the CCA applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.

 

71

"

 

x

 

v

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Thanks Vic you must have read my mind I had colleague aquire the full monty

this morning got to start reading:madgrin:

[victoria_siempre]

Hi Brig

 

The Human Rights Act is also interesting (Article 6 and civil proceedings) and I think could be used to remind a DJ of their obligations to making rulings that comply with the CC Act (and EU Directive of course); but I do not claim to be an expert in this, yet.

 

x

 

v

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

We are also looking at the HRA on this and other ''problems'' it causes ''in a diciplinary situation''.

d

I do agree that there are so DJs who tend to think of themselves as being in a ''higher court'' and

if you and I and other CAGERS put forward arugement properly researched and structured challenges

can be made to the benefit of all who find themselves in litigation.

[victoria_siempre]

Hi Brig

 

This is an illiterate first draft which aims to capture my logic; it will need rephrasing by a learned colleague.

 

The EU Credit Directive has been incorporated into UK law through amendment of the CC Act. A primary purpose of the amendment is “

 

The definition of “creditor” in section 189 of the CCA applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCAcannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.”

 

And that essential consumer protections under the CCA are paramount.

 

It follows that the strictures of the CC Act must be followed by lower courts so as not to breach HRA Article 6.

 

The European Court of Justice has made it crystal clear that:

 

 

 

 

 

Then we go back to Act 1 of our danse macabre.

 

 

x

 

v..

Edited March 28, 2012 by victoria_siempre
cock up

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Nothing wrong with that Vic, as you probably know I'm ''not infavour''

over over using points of law sect.this para that, you have it clearly

and simply understandable.

The important matter to remember is that there is no obligation to

even acknoeledge the ''guidance''.

Good very good.

[victoria_siempre]

Thanks Brig

 

It's cost 2 bottles of Asda's cheap Coat de Ronnie.

 

But it ain't guidance; it is an EU Directive that is an amendment to the CC Act; it is the law.

 

x...

 

v

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Thanks Brig

 

It's cost 2 bottles of Asda's cheap Coat de Ronnie.

 

But it ain't guidance; it is an EU Directive that is an amendment to the CC Act; it is the law.

 

I know of one judge who ''will have no truck with EU '' meddling''

[victoria_siempre]

Hi again Brig

 

"Be you ever so great the law is above you"

 

"A man's ambition must be small to write his name on a sh*t house wall"

 

I think I'm suggesting that the flaunting of law (CCA to get back to basics [John and Edwina]) is precisely what we are testing here; but, I ain't a lawyer.

 

x

 

 

v