Lowell & recon Credit Agreement from 1999 not signed - help pls

[debtangel]

Oh I see

 

Can anyone else expand on that is DD is busy?

 

Would like to get this nipped in the bud to be honest, its playing on my mind a bit. They issued a stat demand on a different debt and I had to go to court, cant be doing with that upset again.

 

Thanks

[fishman123]

Debtangel, we are both at the same stage with these people. Your letter sounds very much like mine in that they are being very selective with the truth.

 

My replies from now are going to be very simple and to the point, they are getting no more info than they need.

 

One question about pre 2007 agreements and recons though, I have been doing a lot of reading lately and am finding conflicting arguments about the need for the original agreement, can anybody clarify this and are there any links you could point me too please?

[postggj]

Dear Sir/Madam

 

This is a formal request under the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR) 2008.

 

I require your organisation to provide written confirmation that states clearly whether you currently hold an original signed Consumer Credit Agreement, or whether you do not hold an original signed Consumer Credit Agreement pertaining to myself.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, an original signed Consumer Credit Agreement is just that; not an application for credit and not a reconstructed or microfiched document from other sources but indeed the original signed document purporting to be signed by myself.

 

Please note that until such times as a legally enforceable, original Consumer Credit Agreement can be produced and a copy sent to me by return, then this letter is not an acknowledgement of debt and this account will remain in an unenforceable state protected in line with s.127 CCA 1974.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Before anyone jumps in, i have included S.127(3) CCA 1974 as this account dates back to 1999 and is a credit card debt

Edited July 4, 2013 by postggj

[postggj]

Desperate daniel

 

If i am barking up the wrong tree, and you have a better alternative, then please shout

[postggj]

FISHMAN123

 

kook up

 

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FWilson_v_First_County_Trust_Ltd_(No_2)&ei=qt_VUZWYDMiV0QX24oD4Cw&usg=AFQjCNEZqxIF656RezDsJ7OPH3bgZ6ZleQ&sig2=B4-Jn8DHqaiQ8FotT2jo_Q&bvm=bv.48705608,d.d2k

 

then follow up with

 

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.consumeractiongroup.co.uk%2Fforum%2Fshowthread.php%3F255093-Waksman-Ruling&ei=MODVUYaANsaI0AXpxoC4BQ&usg=AFQjCNFk-ZzmoR5GfNmFBzGPqPIIKeMYFg&sig2=4qbB2OeVBSAfqZ3JHQ2TYw&bvm=bv.48705608,d.d2k&cad=rja

[Desperate Daniella]

Yes, that is right, but there is also more which should be included.

 

I also never mention the option of court, just in case it puts ideas into their head.

 

I got Lowells to write off a very large sum a couple of years ago, and I'll post shortly but I'm having to run around a bit this week as it's the end of term.

 

As fishman knows, you should never, ever reply to a DCA until the last possible minute as every week passing gets you closer to statute barred!

[Desperate Daniella]

They do need the original agreement if they take it to court so if you make it clear that you know that they know that, and challenge them on everything, then they will probably leave you alone.

[postggj]

Please post your up when you have time

 

Many thanks

[Desperate Daniella]

Won't be long. Honest. Monday at the latest.

[postggj]

[debtangel]

Thanks very much

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi there,

 

I've read through what I sent which got rid of them and as you and Fishman are both going to be replying to the same letters, and they need to look different, I'll let you put it in your own words.

 

Firstly refer to the CPUTR 2008, as above.

 

Then refer to the Waksman Judgment in Carey v HSBC (doesn't matter if you did this in an earlier letter, do it again) Paragraph 234 (4), and repeat the question you've asked in the CPUTR paragraph, but more bluntly. Do you, or do you not, hold a copy of the original alleged credit agreement?

 

Then you should say that the documents they have sent in no way prove that you ever signed a credit agreement which contained the Prescribed Terms as required in the Regulations of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and that they are deliberately trying to mislead you by sending documents that they know very well are not the original documents in an attempt to obtain money which is not legally due to them.

 

And finally say that you will be forwarding their response to the Office of Fair Trading and the Financial Ombudsman.

 

You can make it more punchy if you like.

 

DD

[debtangel]

Thank you for all the help, especially postggj and DD

 

Have drafted the letter now, will get it off to them and see what comes of it.

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi debtangel,

 

Good luck with this. Remember to sound outraged that they are trying it on, and don't post it until day 13!

 

DD

[debtangel]

Hi everyone, just to let you know, they replied and they DO NOT hold a copy of the original credit agreement. Huzzah.

 

So my next question is, when does the debt become statute barred? Last payment was 2009, but my last correspondence to them was 2013.

 

Many thanks!

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

What was the correspondence, did you admit liability in anyway?

[debtangel]

No I haven't admitted anything, I have referred to "the alleged debt" in correspondence.

 

Also, earlier in the thread I was advised to contact OFT and FOS, what, if any benefit would this be to me?

 

They have threatened various debt collection scenarios i.e sending a debt collector round, putting an attachment on my earnings and passing the account to their Solicitor.

 

They placed my account on hold last month and said I had 30 days to reply, at which time debt collection will start again. I don't think there is any point replying to them anymore.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

If no payment or written acknowledgment has been made or is made the debt becomes stat barred in the month of the final missed payment i.e. sometime in 2015

[Guest mahdi]

I am in similar situation with Lowell aswell and wish you good luck and keep you posted.

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi everyone, just to let you know, they replied and they DO NOT hold a copy of the original credit agreement. Huzzah.

 

So my next question is, when does the debt become statute barred? Last payment was 2009, but my last correspondence to them was 2013.

 

Many thanks!

 

That's brilliant news? It's always good to put them on the spot.

 

As Brigadier says, it will become statute barred in 2015.

 

I wouldn't worry about reporting them at the moment. Just keep your head down and keep counting off the days.

[Desperate Daniella]

If you do get any letters threatening further action just send a letter back saying that as they have informed you that they do not hold an agreement for this alleged account you are perplexed by their letter.

 

That's all. Just the one sentence.

[slick132]

Hi DA,

 

If the last payment was made in 2009, the debt would be SB'd 6 years after then, subject to minor points.

 

As regards acknowledging the debt in writing, corresponding about it does NOT necessarily acknowledge the debt.

 

For instance, asking for proof of the debt like a credit agreement does NOT count. An example that WOULD acknowledge the debt could be if you wrote to them referring to the debt or account saying you can't afford to pay now but hope to pay towards it in the next 6 months.

 

[slick132]

Sorry, I posted my reply above without seeing the comments on THIS page.

 

[debtangel]

Good morning.

 

Sadly still getting harassed about this.

 

I had continued to receive threatening letters mentioning that

they would petition to bankrupt me or issue a summons.

 

They passed the debt to their own in-house debt collectors

(if you can call "passed" they probably walked across the room and stuck it on someone else's desk!)

who again were sending these threats.

 

I replied to this debt collectors a few months ago referring them to my previous correspondence

with Lowell and told them that according to Guidance Notes issued by the OFT

on sections 77, 78 and 79 of the CCA 1974 the duty to give information

to debtors and the consequences of non-compliance on the enforceability of the agreement.

 

I also referred them to the Credit Service Association and suggested that they were breaking the code

of conduct and that I also believed that they are in breach of the Consumer Protection

from Unfair Trading Regs 2008.

 

I received a reply from Lowell re the letter I sent.

 

They stated that they had complied with all legal requirements

and guidance and that they haven't breached the CPUTR guidelines.

 

I continued to receive letters again from their debt collection agency

and now I am receiving letters from a Solicitors threatening court action.

 

I do have a couple of other things in my favour.

 

When they sent the so called copy credit agreement

(as previously mentioned a blank piece of paper with my name and old address on)

 

(1) they only sent statements from 2009 until 2010

(2)The statements were not signed

(3) The balance on the last statement does not agree with the amount they are chasing me for.

 

Do I continue to sit tight?

Or should I be replying the letter from the Solicitors?

 

Apologies for bringing this up again, but, I suffer from anxiety and these letters are making my health suffer.

 

Many thanks once again.

[dx100uk]

whats this a carter threat-o-gram

 

says everything bar WILL do anything

 

dx