laughable 'i must sign' response from Moorcroft re CCA letter - old natwest credit card

[Hannay100]

Split out from http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?396381-Observations-please-on-how-I-hope-to-deal-with-a-number-of-debts , addressing a group of similar debts.

 

CCA letters sent , now posting individual cases separately as each progresses:

 

**************

 

This is the last of those 4 matters,

 

a NatWest credit card account being handled by Moorcroft to whom I have been making reduced payments of £5 per month.

 

CCA letter sent last week as advised, typing my name rather than signing it, and leaving the payee name on the Postal Order blank as stressed.

 

I have now received a reply that is manipulative, amateurish, scheming, laughable, or all four.

 

To quote:

 

"Under the instruction of the above client and in order to ensure that your data remains protected,

all credit agreement requests must be hand signed.

 

Also our clients require the £1 fee to be made payable to them.

 

Please re-send your payment made payable to the above named client and re-send along with your hand signed request letter

as soon as possible so that we can action your request." They have returned the Postal Order.

 

I believe this is complete and utter tosh, am I correct?

 

If that is the case, then whether it is deliberate in order to obtain a specimen signature or for some other self-serving purpose,

or is accidental because they have all the professional acumen of a boiled egg and half as much intelligence,

a swift and rather sharp rap on the knuckles is strongly called for plus proper attention to my request

which at this point happens already to be ten days in to the 12+2 allowed to them for complying.

 

Can someone possibly please provide a suitably robust form of words that I can use in reply referring them directly to the appropriate regs and formal provisions and duties for receiving and efficiently dealing with a CCA request? Thank you.

[Conniff]

If you are wary of giving your signature, then make a specific difference in it so it is different from any other you have ever done but recognisable to you, also scan and keep a copy.

[citizenB]

Oh dear, Moorcroft. This company does indeed give many caggers some amusing moments.

 

Electronic/digital signatures are allowed and there is absolutely no legislation or regulation that requires you to sign a CCA request. There is a letter in the link below that you could use as the basis of response.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?433-Debt-Letter-When-company-refuse-CCA-due-to-no-signature

 

I am sure I have saved copies of some of the more bizarre letters received by caggers from this company. You will find they have departments that are called.

 

Pre Home visit department

Pre litigation Department

Pre Court Department

 

They love to copy and paste and sometimes get the sections they copy and paste a bit muddled.

 

They love to imply there is legislation for just about every action taken by them.

 

They still haven't got their heads round the fact that when they start spouting about court action being taken, that unless they are the owner of the account then they cant make any threats of this nature. 95% of their letters breach OFT guidelines.

 

Asking them serious questions like. Please provide a copy of or a link to the legislation you refer to seems to confuse the hell out them and subjects the person requesting the information to pages of "words"

 

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hello Hannay.

 

The main point that jumps out is the ''signature'' required for CCA request this is totally wrong.

The 2nd point is Moorcroft should Immediately pass the request to their client with the fee, most

DCAs comply with this, but Moorcroft have little regard for any form of protocol.

 

The ''attempting'' to obtain a signature of any 'nefarious' reasons, there have been many tales about this none have actually been

substantiated.

 

I would suggest the following to the Compliance Manager at Moorcroft.

 

Ref: use theirs:

 

Sir/Madam,

 

I am receipt of a letter from Moorcroft dated xx. xx. xxxx. in reply to my request made under section 77/78 of CCA 1974.

 

Moorcrofts reply is totally unreasonable and has no merit. Moorcroft must be aware that it should forward my lawful request especially at it claims that NatWest is Moorcrofts' client.I must therefore consider that Moorcroft has failed to meet its obligations in this matter and place the account in to dispute, the usual restrictions apply to the pursuit of the alleged debt.

 

No further communication will be made while the account remains disputed.

 

use RM recorded signed for post check receipt.

 

Also I suggest sending a copy of the letter with an added complaint with the CCA request to NatWest, pointing out the failure of their assigned agent to comply with the CCA request.

[citizenB]

And.. why would you want to send a cheque/postal order made out to "their client", to Moorcroft? Seems a bit long winded to me.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

This is in my opinion a 'ploy' by Moorcroft to enable it to deny that they are responsible for a CCA request that fails due to non production I've seen them claiming the Original creditor failed and Moorcroft are unaffected by the Failure to Comply.

[Hannay100]

edited

[Hannay100]

Oh dear, Moorcroft. This company does indeed give many caggers some amusing moments.

 

Electronic/digital signatures are allowed and there is absolutely no legislation or regulation that requires you to sign a CCA request. There is a letter in the link below that you could ...

 

Fancy bumping in to you here

 

Thank you, and to the extent of my limited knowledge that seems perfect - I do want to snap back at them today.

 

I particularly chuckled over the "Under the instruction of the above client and in order to ensure that your data remains protected" part, wondering whether requesting copy/confirmation of their client's instruction would blow just one fuse or all of them!

 

Thanks a lot!

[citizenB]

 

I particularly chuckled over the "Under the instruction of the above client and in order to ensure that your data remains protected" part, wondering whether requesting copy/confirmation of their client's instruction would blow just one fuse or all of them!

 

Thanks a lot!

 

I swear they sit at their desks with a dictionary and choose one word a day, then use it in all the letters that are sent out that week. They love phrases such as you have focussed on above and others are..

 

"We must emphasise"

"We duly confirm"

 

They are also incredibly nosy. If you advise there is an unresolved dispute with their client, they will automatically suggest that you tell them all about it and should there be litigation what documents and statutory information you will be relying on. This in response to a CCA request ??

 

Why would you want to do that? The Client already knows there is a dispute and what it is all about. How will repeating it all to Moorcroft, who can do sod all about the dispute, help ?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I have it on good authority that NW make no such demands, a close relative works in a senior position in compliance with NW.

[Hannay100]

Hello Hannay.

 

The main point that jumps out is the ''signature'' required for CCA request this is totally wrong. The 2nd point is .......

 

....... suggest sending a copy of the letter with an added complaint with the CCA request to NatWest, pointing out the failure of their assigned agent to comply with the CCA request.

 

Hello Brigadier and thank you. Certain of the concerns you point out had also crossed my mind, such as the potential for misuse of a specimen signature. I didn't have a suspicious bone in my body until I came here

 

I will be responding to Moorcroft today as suitable, and will copy-in Natwest with a complaint also if I can find the right person/office/address to send it to or else I am sure it would just disappear never to be seen again.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hello Brigadier and thank you. Certain of the concerns you point out had also crossed my mind, such as the potential for misuse of a specimen signature. I didn't have a suspicious bone in my body until I came here

 

I will be responding to Moorcroft today as suitable, and will copy-in Natwest with a complaint also if I can find the right person/office/address to send it to or else I am sure it would just disappear never to be seen again.

 

This lot are pathetic in their responses, please keep us up to date on responses.

[Hannay100]

I most certainly will, and I will probably be applying your input and that of CitizenB here to the matter covered in my Experto Credite thread from this morning too in which NatWest also figures so might be receiving two letters from me not one!

 

Although, there's some coinfusion at the moment as Experto Credite, who actually appears not to be very experto at all, is wanting to divert me to Royal Bank of Scotland and I can't understand why so am entirely reluctant to do so anyway ... quite a puzzle but one I need to get to the bottom of.

 

So I now have four CCA letters out and current, and none has been without prompt challenge/deflection/hand-washing by the DCA concerned. Bodes well!

 

Thank you for your continued support and guidance.

[dx100uk]

oh dear

 

Moorcroft are losing another cash cow.

 

its not our responsibility to hold the correct paperwork to be able to fleece people

if the original client does not hold it

please don't stop paying

 

dx

[Hannay100]