Pra group Claim form - old Mbna Credit card help

[metalman]

Cheers andy much appreciated.

[metalman]

UPDATE

 

i've been away for a few days and on the mat dated 28th august? was a pack from pra of credit card statements from 26th june 2012 to 24 april 2013

what looks like a cca with electronic signature,

with a pre-contractual explanations sheet

and pre-contract credit information sheet.

 

The cover letter stated information as requested and we are awaiting further documentation to complete your request and we will not contact you until we have this.

 

Open a letter that has just come today dated 23rd august from the solicitor confirming receipt of my defence

,"we have written to the court to inform it that we wish to proceed with our claim"

 

So that's where we are,the cca text is tiny but just readable,If its better i'll get the scanner out and upload later

 

Just wondering what's next?

 

Cheers metalman

[AndyOrch]

Yes please scan and upload (remove any identifiable data first) what you have received.

 

With regards to whats next...allocation if they wish to proceed.....if they proceed you will receive a Directions Questionnaire for completion..post up once (if) you get this.

 

 

Andy

[metalman]

here goes

merged .pdf

Edited September 3, 2016 by dx100uk
docs merged rotated and shrunk in size

[metalman]

UPDATE

From the court i've received notice of proposed allocation to the small claims track and to fill in form N180 by 16th september.

 

Just wondering how to proceed as there's a box to tick saying do you have all the information req'd looking at the attachments on my previous post do i?

 

One letter pra said they're still waiting for more information that i requested

 

Any tips much appreciated

Metalman

[dx100uk]

I don't think all the pages of the T&C's are there

its refs 10c in the first page too

you don't have that

 

 

what about the DN NOA etc?

[metalman]

hi dx deffo no default notice or notice of assignment which i'm guessing is what they mean by they've requested this information

 

excuse my ignorance but what's refs 10c ?

and if the t&c's aren't all there do i just return the pack to court declining mediation due to insufficient information?

 

Cheers metalman

[dx100uk]

read the t&c's

what is there makes ref to a later clause 10c..

 

you don't have it

you really do need to go thru things with a fine toothed comb

[metalman]

ok will do but given the lack of requested info do i turn down mediation?

cheers mm

[jackreacher]

I have withdrawn my comments as I am Not able to help above and beyond the information given, and leave you in the good hands of Andy, Dx and shamrocker.. Padawan

Edited September 4, 2016 by jackreacher
Not able to help above and beyond the information given

[dx100uk]

every little helps jack

 

 

dx

[mercyblue]

read the t&c's

what is there makes ref to a later clause 10c..

 

you don't have it

you really do need to go thru things with a fine toothed comb

 

Your right dx it is only section 1-3. If you look just above the signature it says that and says you have to click on a link to see the complete terms sections 1-15

[jackreacher]

Metalman ..you need to read a few threads and understand what is happenning. DX is giving you the clues. If they don't supply you with your full agreement including the original Full terms and conditions they are in trouble.

 

Find a thread as to why T&C's are important. S78 is a good place.

[shamrocker]

Good to see you back on here JR!

[mercyblue]

Metalman ..you need to read a few threads and understand what is happenning. DX is giving you the clues. If they don't supply you with your full agreement including the original Full terms and conditions they are in trouble.

 

Find a thread as to why T&C's are important. S78 is a good place.

 

S78 is the duty of the creditor to provide information S60 covers the form and content of agreements. They certainly don't need to provide the entire terms and conditions they have to provide the prescribed terms not the same thing.

 

section 189 describes "prescribed" as "means prescribed by regulations made by the Secretary of State;"

You then need to look at S60 for those regulations.

 

To quote carey paragraph 16

 

"Accordingly, the document which is signed by the parties (and which forms all or part of the executed agreement) must itself contain the Prescribed Terms and the name and address of the debtor. Other terms may be incorporated by reference but not the Prescribed Terms."

 

Even though I believe this is a post april 2007 case so s127(3) doesn't apply but even if it was s127(3) states

 

“The Court shall not make an enforcement order under s 65(1) if section 61(1) (a) (signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under s60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor ..(whether or not in the prescribed manner).”

 

The point here is the use of the term "prescribed terms" so at no point has the creditor had to provide the full terms and conditions but supply the prescribed terms.

 

Its another myth that the full terms must be supplied I am sorry but if you go into court using that as your only defence you are going to get destroyed. I do realize that people don't want to hear that but sadly that is the reality I think it's better the OP hears it here first rather than in a courtroom and is left reeling.

 

So what we have here is the prescribed terms and conditions supplied with the full terms been referenced (by the hyperlink) perfectly acceptable.

[mercyblue]

For further clarification an executed agreement is also defined by s189 of the CCA

 

“executed agreement ” means a document, signed by or on behalf of the parties, embodying the terms of a regulated agreement, or such of them as have been reduced to writing;"

 

So an S78 request fulfillment should have the prescribed terms (as defined in S60) with it to be deemed an executed agreement.

[jackreacher]

Thanks Shamrocker, good to see you to and Wow! you have become a legal genius in my abscence. I am just catching up on the changes and in particular how you can defend post april 2007 agreements. Do you know of a useful thread I could read?

 

I don't have any legal challenges myself but SB is coming up on a lot soon and I am expexcting to have to fight my corner. ..although only 1 is post 2007

 

My latest victory was against a Cardiff speeding camera with the highest catch rate in the country. Postjoining on a thread is on here somewhere.

 

The Cag help was self important non existent and mocking (not like in this section).. won anyway.

[jackreacher]

I don't have any idea what you are on about, this defendants problem is clearly post 2007. I never mentioned any of the above sections for that reason. I am fully aware of Carey and have used it many times. You have missed Dx's point about 10C.

 

S78 is a duty to supply a true copy of the whole of your agreement at the time of signing...(amongst other things).

 

Carey v HSBC made it very clear that the creditor needs to provide a true copy of the executed agreement, and where the original had been varied either a copy of each discrete term that had been varied or a copy of the current terms and conditions as the contract stands at the date of the request. The Creditor does not need to send a photo copy of the original agreement although many people still think (wrongly) that they do.

The High Court in Carey ruled that the underlying purpose of s78 is for information, to give you the info you need about the terms of your contract. So a photo copy of the original isn’t needed, but what is needed is the creditor must produce in an easily legible format the 'terms of your contract'...

 

 

The point Dx is makingand I am highlighting on his behalf , is there is a mistake in the provided T and C's (10C), therefore it is not a 'true copy' . hence the need to read up on s78.

[shamrocker]

Thanks Shamrocker, good to see you to and Wow! you have become a legal genius in my abscence. I am just catching up on the changes and in particular how you can defend post april 2007 agreements. Do you know of a useful thread I could read?

 

I don't have any legal challenges myself but SB is coming up on a lot soon and I am expexcting to have to fight my corner. ..although only 1 is post 2007

 

My latest victory was against a Cardiff speeding camera with the highest catch rate in the country. Postjoining on a thread is on here somewhere.

 

The Cag help was self important non existent and mocking (not like in this section).. won anyway.

 

Hi JR

 

I'm certainly no legal expert, but I've learnt a bit from my own experiences, plus some stuff you sent me a while back taught me to look at things in a different ways. I seem to be attracted to Lowell and PRA/AK claim threads for some reason! Lol

 

I tend to not get too bogged down in defending post-2007 claims as I'm a bit lazy is that respect, and instead tend to focus on arriving at a favourable compromise. I feel that, unless the Claimant is particularly stupid or lazy, they'll get the claim over the line in the end. However, if anyone can find an angle on something and argue it, it's probably you!

 

Did you say you have a thread on here about the speeding offence win? I wouldn't mind picking your brains on that.

 

Sham

 

EDIT: found your thread.

[mercyblue]

"S78 is a duty to supply a true copy of the whole of your agreement at the time of signing...(amongst other things)"

It is a duty to supply an executed agreement (ignoring the other things for now). An executed agreement as I have stated above is defined in S189 that is a fact.

The executed agreement needs to contain the prescribed terms as defined by S60 at no point in the cca act does it say the entire terms and conditions need to be provided.

 

I haven't missed DX's point about 10c it is just that it makes no odds the prescribed terms are there. The paragraph I quoted from Carey shows it is quite acceptable to merely reference terms that are not part of the prescribed terms.

 

If you actually read the carey judgement you will see that it always refers to the prescribed terms because that is all that is necessary under the cca act.

 

The point of putting S127(3) was to show the use of the phrase prescribed terms.

 

It is easy to omit using the term prescribed terms and conditions and just use terms and conditions which I think where the misunderstanding occurs.

[jackreacher]

"S78 is a duty to supply a true copy of the whole of your agreement at the time of signing...(amongst other things)"

It is a duty to supply an executed agreement (ignoring the other things for now). An executed agreement as I have stated above is defined in S189 that is a fact.

The executed agreement needs to contain the prescribed terms as defined by S60 at no point in the cca act does it say the entire terms and conditions need to be provided.

 

I haven't missed DX's point about 10c it is just that it makes no odds the prescribed terms are there. The paragraph I quoted from Carey shows it is quite acceptable to merely reference terms that are not part of the prescribed terms.

 

If you actually read the carey judgement you will see that it always refers to the prescribed terms because that is all that is necessary under the cca act.

 

The point of putting S127(3) was to show the use of the phrase prescribed terms.

 

It is easy to omit using the term prescribed terms and conditions and just use terms and conditions which I think where the misunderstanding occurs.

 

I understand prescribed terms and Carey and with countless appearences in front of a judge and never losing I can assure you you I have argued the claimant needs to provide a true full agreement with all the terms and conditions as well as the FRC prescribed terms... however it is up to the defendant to state what they have provided unders78 is not true and why..in which case it is turns to the claimant to provide the real documentation.

 

So if 10c is wrong the defendant states this and puts the claimant to strict proof what they have supplied is genuine and the claimant will have to find a full copy of the original signed agreement..(see Carey) All of it, as 10c is not in FRC. So it is important ref s78. Non compliance with s78 if argued properly means the case can not continue until rectified.

 

In my case aginst MBNA (having won a few previous) they had two barristers and a well known legal representative of the claimant. Using Carey, they all had to agree I was correct, the case was adjourned for months while they found a true copy of my agreement not just the prescribed terms.

 

The judge two months later brought this up in his 2 hour verdict saying I was correct. I won but this was important because of costs and the claimant knew the rules but had not followed them. Had I lost they would have been liable up to the last hearing.

 

 

its up to you but this is what I found to be the reality of the matter regarding s78.

Edited September 5, 2016 by Andyorch
external referral removed

[mercyblue]

I assume your MBNA case is here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?420659-MBNA-Idem...-in-court-Friday-31-March-2014..-help-needed.-**-Claim-Dismissed-**

 

From your own post on that thread 115

 

won on estoppel. I had proof of a bilateral agreement, I paid in line with that agreement, MBNA unlawfully defaulted &Terminated without me having missed a payment.

 

"Importantly he said "the Claimant Idem DCA could issue a new Default notice and add more money and interest" .... The claimant has said they will do that. Is there anything I can do to stop that happenning.. accept the termination etc, I know there are differing views on this subject.

 

He did not find in favour of me on any CCA point, "

 

I certainly applaud you on your excellent victory and that thread is a very interesting read. I do fail to see why you brought it up though your win in that case had nothing to do with the CCA act.

 

It's only after reading that thread that I knew what you meant by FRC JR!

 

 

Back to this case seems to me by what I have seen is there is an executed agreement (I would say with the relevant prescribed t&c's but that's required to be an executed agreement anyway).

Edited September 5, 2016 by Andyorch
External referral removed

[metalman]

Hi guys received a bundle of paperwork from pra,

 

i've scanned them for you to look at

but didn't scan the year's worth of statements,

the expenditure questionaire and the cca that i've already uploaded.

I need to respond by 16th to the courts and Pra by 19th sept

 

All advice very welcome

Thanks mm

PRA DQ .pdf

[metalman]

Any suggestions? or is it time to negotiate maybe f+f settlement (would that stop ccj?) or a monthly repayment?

Not sure if it's relevent but the cca text is barely legible it's that small (see attached)

 

Need to decide as the clock is ticking

Thanks mm

[shamrocker]

Have you received directions and a court date yet?