Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Which would require a hearing....so the fee would be £255.00
    • When providing a copy of an executed agreement in response to a request under section 78(1) of the Act:   a.     must a creditor provide a photocopy (or other form of complete copy) of the original agreement that was signed by the debtor or at least provide a copy which is derived directly from the original agreement or complete copy thereof? or b.     can a creditor provide a document which is a reconstitution of the original agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself?   It was held that a creditor can satisfy its duty under section 78 by providing a reconstituted version of the executed agreement which may be from sources other than the actual signed agreement itself.   The judge accepted that as a matter of law, section 78 does not itself require any particular explanation as to how the copy was made. However, as a matter of good practice and so as not to mislead the debtor, it is desirable that the creditor should explain that it is providing a reconstituted as opposed to a physical copy of the executed agreement. This will also explain why the copy might otherwise look a little odd. The creditor can also explain in the letter that this procedure is satisfactory under the Act. The judge also provided that the following information needs to be included in the reconstituted copy agreement (assuming of course that it was present in the original):   1.     Heading: Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 2.     Name and address of the debtor 3.     Name and address of the creditor 4.     Cancellation clause applicable to the executed agreement.   All of the above may be provided on a sheet which is separate from the full statement of terms and conditions which also forms part of the reconstituted agreement. The creditor may, however, decide to reconstitute the agreement in a different way so that, for example, the information above is populated electronically onto the same sheet as that which sets out the terms and conditions, or some of them. The judge stated that he did not intend to prescribe the precise form of the reconstituted agreement. The key point is what information it should contain, subject to the point that its format should not be such as to mislead the debtor as to what he agreed to.   The judge also considered whether a statement like the one appearing in the reconstructed application form in Carey referring to the agreement to the terms and conditions "attached" needs to be included in the reconstituted copy. Alternatively if the application form had said "I agree to the terms overleaf", should that statement be included. The judge held that this aspect of the form is not necessary for the purpose of the section 78 copy, although there is nothing to stop a bank from putting it in or indeed from furnishing a copy of the type of application form or signature page that the debtor would have signed, as some banks have done. The statement referring to terms and conditions is not itself prescribed information and the supply of the terms and conditions which were applicable at the time will tell the debtor what he needs to know in terms of the content of what he signed up to, including the presence (or otherwise) of the prescribed terms.   In practical terms what this is likely to mean is that if the creditor chooses to use as the section 78 copy the section 63 copy, which would have been provided to that particular debtor at the time following execution of the agreement, this will be sufficient provided that the information referred to above is supplied. This exercise is not a mere formality. The creditor will need to check carefully that the details of the debtor at the time are correct and that those are the particular terms (including prescribed terms) that he/she agreed to. This is to ensure that it is an honest and accurate copy.   Must a creditor provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (Regulations) as to form, as at the date the agreement was made in order to comply with section 78?   A creditor need not, in complying with section 78, provide a document which would comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Regulations as to form, as at the date the agreement was made.   Must the copy provided under section 78 include the debtor's name and address as at the date when the agreement was made, and if so in what form? The section 78 copy must contain the name and address of the debtor as it was at the time of the execution of the agreement. But the creditor can provide the name and address from whatever source it has of those details. It does not have to take them from the executed agreement itself.     If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, is a copy of the executed agreement as varied, a sufficient copy for the purposes of section 78(1), or must the creditor provide a copy of the original agreement as well?   If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, the creditor must still provide a copy of the original agreement, as well as the varied terms.     As your agreement is post April 2007  Section 61(1)(a) and 127(3)   Consumer Credit Act 1974 would not apply.   Andy
    • well start a new thread for the court claim.   as for this one i'd await the letter of claim  
    • Useful information...   And....   https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part55
    • nice and ofcourse totally unlawful.   £349.50 is the usual sum RLP try and fleece out of people under some silly civil threats none of goes to the store it all goes in RLP's pocket for their next staff holiday paid for by mugs that fall for their twaddle ignore!!
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2498 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I have had a 30-day SIM only rolling contract with T-mobile for over 12 months.It had a fixed allowance of landlines and texts and unlimited landlines for monthly tariff of 15.32+VAT. On 2012-10-14 I lost my handset (not provided by T-mobile), in a pub at a party on Cowley Road Uxbridge. A couple of days later (I can find exact date in my email) I went to a T-mobile store in downtown Birmingham on or near Corporation Street whereI was visiting at the time, and asked to report my phone lost. The store keeper allowed me to use his phone to speak about this to Customer Service for T-mobile to who I also requested for the service to be cancelled,


A man begged me to keep the plan, and he would not only send me a shiny new phone but my monthly tariff would be 10.00( pound sign key does not work on my keyboard). In addition to all the existing benefits he said I could call 0870-etc numbers at no additional cost as they would be counted as mobile minutes. I agreed. Two months later I happened to log into my online T-mobile account as saw a bill for around 100.00. I'd been charged 50 quid for November and 50 quid for December.


The first thing I noticed on the bill were calls that I did not make,which they say I did, to some kind of premium mobile numbers. I also found they were charging me for landlines. So I went to that shop again as soon as I could which was on 2012-12-07 and they again put me on the phone to tmobile. The latter kept me waiting for over an hour and said any charges on a bill would always have to be paid. I asked her to cancel my plan and she seemed to squak at me.(I did read out some of the mobile numbers I never called but I am billed for. So I hung up and asked the storegirl and she said it was none of her business. I then mentioned how they clone phones meaning it is possible for someone else, (including T-mobile themselves) to make calls (or add calls) from/to your phone without you having made any. She would not budge.


I wrote a letter by recorded delivery(BY015837563GB)2012-12-10 to Tmobile complaints about the discrepancy and they have signed and received it on 2012-12-12.


I subsequently downloaded my bills for the last 12 months and to my shock found they have changed my online information for a contract of a few years. This is NOT what I agreed to, when the T-mobile man said he was going to let me keep the everything the same except my contract would be for 10.00 a month.


I also tried to talk with Tmobile Customer Service by dialling 150 on my Tmobile on 2012-12-16 which call I monitored. They refuse to budge and said such a big company as T-mobile would NEVER charge anybody for what they dont owe, like the girl on the phone on 2012-12-07. I have cancelled the direct debit with Natwest bank on 2012-12-16 after speaking with T-mobile. I was about to be debitted on 2012-12-17. However they have told me I will be paying through the nose several years monthly bills and otherwise my credit rating will be affected.


I also found that whereas T-mobile customer service still say I have unlimited free landlines they have been charging for them since the new phone and lower tariff. I also found whereas the T-mobile website says they are collecting 100 quid off me as joint bill for November and December my bank statements show I have already been debitted 50 quid for November. I seems Tmobile makes debits in stealth. They have additionally billed me in the itemized bill for mobile internet use but I have an old-fashioned phone with no email or mobile internet, just calls and texts.


In February I had someone send me premium rate texts when I was attending a party, which I did not ask for on the same T-mobile. I then asked for a refund as T-mobile said the 3rd party provider of those texts was msn and the girl at that number wont budge. She just cries "You had to have made them, you are paying" and hangs up.


I used to be good and having my fraudulent transacations reversed etc but now they appear to have started a new reality where they wont budge an inch.Even though I do reasonable amount of bookkeeping I am not successful in dealing with the fraud as the traders are 100% inflexible, just say "You pay" and hang up. What to do as my credit rating will be affected or I will have to pay out hundreds of pounds.Please tell me how to beat the crooked company as I have in the last 2 years been abused and abused and the complaints system are 100% watertight-I just have to take it


Mohini Hersom

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send a Subject Access Request to Tmobile and specifically mention that you want recordings or transcript of all calls.

Edited by Conniff

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...