Debt Collection Agencies & Consumer Credict Act 1974

[stiffnuts]

I have been looking on the net for a while for a copy of that to read... As I have seen people refering to it... Just can't seem to find it anywhere...

 

Don't suppose you have a link to it ?

 

Zootscoot may be kind enough to give you a copy

 

Otherwise when I get into work on monday if I have time I will log onto lexus nexus and try and get you a copy.

[JonCris]

wow what a load of bollocks, I am totally amazed that TS gave this advice and in writing. I would never ever give advice in writing. I may give my opinion over the phone but to go into this amount of detail in writing is crazy.

 

Did a TS department really give this advise and in writing ????

 

I agree what a load of wotsit! but then I'm not surprised. The advice eminating from many a TS is a joke. I particularly like the bit about "you agreed to the banks terms and conditions" Also their remarks about "if you agreed to have your overdraft added to your loan tough! What more utter drivel don't they know consumers are already recovering such managed loan payments.

 

Someone should send them details of this site for future reference.

 

Whilst the sarcasim is noted zootscoot I suggest that not only should that TS seek advice but also some on this board

[tbern123]

Someone should send them details of this site for future reference.

 

 

lol I think they already know about it...

 

Stiffnuts, works for the Trading Standards

[JonCris]

lol I think they already know about it...

 

Stiffnuts, works for the Trading Standards

 

Excellent!!

 

He/she must be pulling their hair out when they see such nonsence being told to consumers by other members of TS.

[elsinore]

Someone should send them details of this site for future reference.

 

Well, I could. But should I?

 

I wanted to complain to someone because I was infuriated by AK’s disgraceful lack of business ethics. Trading Standards was suggested as the main repository for such complaints.

.

However, TS have variously referred some complainants to Consumer Direct, the FSA, the DTI, the FOS and Uncle Tom Cobley. In that respect I suppose I did well to get a response at all.

 

Stiffnuts, perhaps you would confirm that complaints regarding the behaviour of DCAs should indeed be directed at Trading Standards? Or are we barking up the wrong tree?

 

Elsinore

[JonCris]

Absolutley no reflection on TS staff like stiffnuts but the others seem to only take an interest if it includes a photo op

[stiffnuts]

I have been looking on the net for a while for a copy of that to read... As I have seen people refering to it... Just can't seem to find it anywhere...

 

Don't suppose you have a link to it ?

 

I have a word document of the legislation for you how can I ping it over to you or get it onto the forum

[redfox]

Hi,

 

Just been reading through this thread and just need a bit of advice. A friend of mine has an outstanding bill with Kingsway Housing for rent arrears who have passed his debt over to Credit G Ltd. They are threatening to add charges to the outstanding amount unless he pays in full. Can he still send a CCA Credt G or does this come under another Act? Any help would be grately appreciated.

[stiffnuts]

Hi,

 

Just been reading through this thread and just need a bit of advice. A friend of mine has an outstanding bill with Kingsway Housing for rent arrears who have passed his debt over to Credit G Ltd. They are threatening to add charges to the outstanding amount unless he pays in full. Can he still send a CCA Credt G or does this come under another Act? Any help would be grately appreciated.

 

I think you should start a new thread mate or maybe the mods will move it?

[Joa]

Rent arrears are a different pair of boots; no CCA but SAR to find out the info precisely. The crucial issue are; making sure that the DCA have a correct info and negotiation. You need to send the one of the letters from the following link:http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/20758-creditors-dcas-letter-templates.html#post162353

 

Just make sure your friend shows that he tries his best; good income & expenditure sheet, first payment attached etc. Court will reject any applications by DCA if the tenant is striving to co-operate.

dca cannot expect payment in full if the tenant shows that they are not able to do it. As for DCA charges, add request for their charges list in your SAR letter. Your friend may aso need to visit a CAB or siilar for income maximisation advice.

[zootscoot]

Stiffnuts 1. You have totally misunderstood the regs and I do not have the time to explain them to you in full. However I will get straight to the crux of the argument because you are looking more and more out of your depth.

 

The final crux is whether a signature is required under section 77/78

 

The only thing you have got right is that there is mention of section 77/78 in reg 3(2)(d) (easy for you really because you have a copy of the regs in front of you. I am trying to work from memory as I am not at work at present so dont have access to lexus nexus)

 

What the reg 3(2)(d) says is that the only thing that may be left out of the copy of an agreement sent under section 77/78 is a description of pawn (if a person takes in pawn to be used as surety).

 

Therefore a signature is required

 

 

So is the Information Commissioners office wrong as well?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/46257-dca-looking-my-passport-2.html#post372596

 

Where does it state that s.77/8 is excluded from Regulation 3?

 

Reg 3 (1) refers to any copy of an executed agreement.

[tbern123]

So is the Information Commissioners office wrong as well?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/46257-dca-looking-my-passport-2.html#post372596

 

Where does it state that s.77/8 is excluded from Regulation 3?

 

Reg 3 (1) refers to any copy of an executed agreement.

 

lol, as soon as I saw this posted in the other thread, I knew it wouldn't take long to be posted here....

 

For the benefit of everyone else, this is what it states:

 

3 General requirements as to form and content of copy documents

(1) Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act shall be a true copy thereof.

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy--

(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instrument or other document relating to the debtor, hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancellable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of the signature by the debtor of an agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

© in the case of any copy of an unexecuted agreement delivered or sent to the debtor or hirer under section 62 of the Act, the name and address of the debtor or hirer; and

[(d) in the case of any copy of an executed agreement given to the debtor under section 77(1) of the Act for fixed-sum credit, or under section 78(1) for running-account credit, under which a person takes any articles in pawn, any description of the article taken in pawn.]

[tbern123]

If companies, don't have to provide true copies of executed credit agreements, why do they then ?

[mcuth]

So is the Information Commissioners office wrong as well?.

 

Leaving aside the signature box thing for a moment - in that other post, the ICO wrote: "Therefore there is no requirement for the company to send you a copy of the original agreement. They may simply send you a copy of the terms and conditions of the agreement." - ummm, really? s77/state:

 

"shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it"

 

I'm not sure I'd 100% trust the ICO to provide accurate info relating to the CCA anyway....

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[zootscoot]

If companies, don't have to provide true copies of executed credit agreements, why do they then ?

 

It may be easier to phtocopy if its in your file than recreating a new one.

 

"shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it"

 

 

 

The definition of what is a copy of an executed agreement is provided by Regulation 3

 

I'm not sure I'd 100% trust the Information Commissioners Office to provide accurate info relating to the CCA anyway....

 

 

Its not just the ICO that have stated this. Two Trading Standards that I know of also have and also various Companies are also stating it. Are they all wrong?

[mcuth]

The definition of what is a copy of an executed agreement is provided by Regulation 3

 

Which doesn't say that a set of Ts&Cs can replace a copy of the executed agreement. Remember, I wasn't referring to the signature box (I wrote: "Leaving aside the signature box thing for a moment"), but this sentence: ""Therefore there is no requirement for the company to send you a copy of the original agreement. They may simply send you a copy of the terms and conditions of the agreement."

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[Determined]

Debt CollectionAgencies are covered by sections 55,60,61,62,63,65,127,179 and 180 of the CCA 1974 Regulation 3 refers to the form in which the agreemnet was made ie the document you sign and should have a copy of when you first make the agreement - as you may be aware banks, credit card companies etc issue revised terms and conditions on a regular basis - so it is the current terms and conditions (or terms and conditions that applied at time DCA took over account) which may vary from the original agreement. DCAs are covered by CCA and when they take over an account whether as agents for the bank or on a bought debt any court action has to be taken in the name of the bank you had agreement with so CCA still applies. Thats my reading of it - hope it is helpful.

[breadline]

Ive just tried to read this thread and its so confusing and i cant make a pattern of action from it as its still in gathering strength in facts for the issue its self.

 

But If it was possible when the facts have been confirmed and set, i would love to see the results in a flow chart due to the different directions teh issue seems to take with a lot of twists involved.

 

I would offer but haven't a clue as to the facts, i think it would be a great asset for the site.

 

BL:)

[elsinore]

I'm with you BL. There must be many of us who have little or no knowledge of the arcane laws and regulations which these guys are delving into. I'm bewildered by the information (some of it contradictory) which is piling up in this and other threads.

 

Are we anywhere near a summary, which you could all agree on, which clearly states what is and what isn't required?

 

Elsinore

[stiffnuts]

So is the Information Commissioners office wrong as well?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/46257-dca-looking-my-passport-2.html#post372596

 

Where does it state that s.77/8 is excluded from Regulation 3?

 

Reg 3 (1) refers to any copy of an executed agreement.

 

 

All you had to do was post and say look what the IC office said. But no because they have said what they have you think you know it all again.

 

The information commssioners office have got it wrong and since when do they deal with the consumer credit act and its ancillary regulations. I tell you what I do for a living and yet you still insist on bringing this up.

 

I dont care what the ICO or another TS department says, if they cant read the regs properly (a bit like you really) then thats not my business.

 

A SIGNATURE IS REQUIRED. If it wasnt the it would totally defeat the purpose of section 77/78.

 

And you say are they all wrong. Yes Just like you they are wrong

 

3(2)(b) refers to 62/63

 

please read page 25 of this

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/CC4C7B5C-2152-4EC7-B850-C3B6E646869D/0/oft018.pdf

[martinpar]

Stiffnuts, I'm inclined to go with your thinking but that's more because the alternative view is not sensible. As you say, what is the point of getting a copy if it does not have to be a copy? However, experience has taught me that common sense and the law do not always go together. It may be that, in classic fashion, a later regulation intended to address a particular point has resulted in the destruction of another earlier regulation.

 

I'm guessing that regulation 3 was intended to make the original execution simpler for everyone, with no thought given to a much later request to prove the debt.

 

Is there something in contract law which could apply as reinforcement? I would have thought that you cannot enforce a disputed contract generally unless you can produce a copy of the executed contract?

[stiffnuts]

All I can say to all is please please please read page 25 of the above link half way down the page after the box and you will see what reg 3(2)(b) was refering to.

 

3(2)(b) relates to the first paragraph and 3(2)© relates to the second paragrapgh of the OFT guidance.

[martinpar]

So what you're saying is that reg 3(2)(b) refers to is the original agreement and its carbon copies (for want of a better word)? The supply of a copy following a CCA request is a seperate issue?

 

That makes sense to me but where is this spelled out and what is to stop a court taking the other view?

[stiffnuts]

So what you're saying is that reg 3(2)(b) refers to is the original agreement and its carbon copies (for want of a better word)? The supply of a copy following a CCA request is a seperate issue?

 

That makes sense to me but where is this spelled out and what is to stop a court taking the other view?

 

More or less.

 

A court would never take another view because its not a matter of case law or opnion, its a matter of fact. The regs and its ammendments (when read in there entirety quite clearly state that the only thing that may be left out of a copy of an agreement given under section 77/78 is a description of pawn) I gave tinkerbelle a copy of the regs which should be placed in the library.

 

Did you read the OFT information pdf?

[martinpar]

Yes, I read page 25, which is what brought me round to your way of thinking. I suppose I should read the whole lot together and try to get a clearer idea but I don't think I have the time or the peace to do so. Are there no published authorities on this which give opinions to back up your arguments?

 

It just concerns me that there is so much interpretation involved in this. It would be nice if there was an independent source we could refer to.