Barclays OD - 5 Defaulted Accounts on CRa file !! 4 from lowells !! for the sane debt!!

[tifo]

Hi,

 

Noticed on my credit files that for a debt i have with Lowell Portfolio (with Lowell Financial managing it), i have 2 defaults showing for the 1 account.

 

Interestingly, different company names have been used at Experian and Equifax.

 

2 defaults for same account from Lowell Portfolio I at Experian.

 

2 defaults for same account from Lowell Financial at Equifax.

 

So that makes it 4 defaults for 1 account!

 

It also has it stated as a Barclaycard credit card and joint account when it was a business account (me tradign as). I've never had a Barclaycard.

 

This is obviously dramatically affecting my credit score. Its full of inaccuracies!

 

Any advice please? First port of call and where to write to ICO?

 

This is what it states in my files ....

 

Experian

 

Joint Account Lowell Portfolio I Ltd Credit Card / Store Card (never had a credit card)

Default : £xxx Defaulted : 28/09/xx Current Balance : £xxx

Status History : 8

File updated for period to 15/10/xx

 

Joint Account Lowell Portfolio I Ltd Credit Card / Store Card (never had a credit card)

Default : £xxx Defaulted : 28/09/xx Current Balance : £xxx

Status History : 8

File updated for period to 06/08/xx

 

Equifax

 

Lowell Financial Ltd (I) Credit Card (never had a credit card)

Terms : 0 @ £0 Monthly

Balances : Limit £0

Start £0

Current £+xxx

Default £xxx

Effective Date : Start

Default 09/xx

End 28/09/xx

Last updated : 25/10/xx

Monthly Status D

 

Lowell Financial Ltd (I) Credit Card (Joint Account) (never had a credit card)

Terms : 0 @ £0 Monthly

Balances : Limit £0

Start £0

Current £+xxx

Default £xxx

Effective Date : Start

Default 09/xx

End 28/09/xx

Last updated : 19/09/xx

Monthly Status D

[InKogneeToh]

Have you sent a CCA request to them yet?

 

Regards, Pam

[tifo]

yes, sent this week gone.

 

not had any reply from them, not even a 'we'll get back to you'.

 

but that notwithstanding, i'll still be chasing them for the credit file info, this is just not on.

 

i will need to get 2 of the 4 defaults removed, as well as ask for financial compensation (!) for the damage caused.

 

if Lowell Portfolio have bought the debt, then Lowell Financial have no right entering defaults, and vice versa. One of them should not even be processing my data, as per tberns Cabot thread.

 

oooooh .. what a lovely mess !

 

then there are the credit agencies, they are obviously holding false information and are a party to this.

[InKogneeToh]

I would wait for the 12 + 1 month time limit to elapse (if it does) and then demand that they remove all entries on your credit file as they will have failed to prove that a debt exists.

 

That way, if they come up with a true copy of the agreement at a later date then you will have their criminal offence to fight back with.

 

Also, as Laiste recommends, I will not be sending any reminder letters regarding the CCA request time limits. If they don't know the law that's their problem.

 

Regards, Pam

[InKogneeToh]

Re: your amended post - you could certainly insist that the 2 Lowell Financial defaults are removed immediately under the DPA rules. To avoid this they will have to show that they own the debt (rather than L P 1) and if so, as you say it will be visa versa.

 

Regards, Pam

[tifo]

i agree Pam, i am also taking Laiste's advice and keeping quiet. Let them default!

 

As for the defaults, i will talk to Information Commissioners Office first and see what they say. I've never contacted them so if anyone has a contact or address that would be appreciated.

 

Then i intend to have them removed, but also take whatever action i can as to why it was done in the first place : 1 - without them owning the debt and 2 - because of 1 they should not have had my details.

 

This will then lead to the issue of the buyer and the manager passing information without asking me first, as happens with all DCA's, and show my example of multiple defaults being a result of this, with many laws being broken and me being affected adversely.

 

Then, i ask Lowell for financial compensation, if i can.

[isuedlowellandwon]

You can download a form to complain to the Information Commissioner here or even complain completing one online.

 

The ICO are ok to deal with, a little slow but that is to be expected from any government agency....

 

If you post a complaint form send it recorded!

 

Data Protection Complaints – Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)

[tifo]

Here is the letter i am sending them ... can someone OK it please ...

 

It has come to my attention that both Lowell Portfolio I Ltd and Lowell Financial Ltd have entered two defaults each relating to the above account. The credit file information also contains incorrect information.

 

This is a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 (processing information without consent) as well as the Human Rights Act 1998 (breach of my right of privacy under article 8).

 

You will be aware that only one default can be active per account at any time. However, I understand that only the creditor can enter this information. Please explain why, not being the creditor, one of the above has entered two defaults on my credit file, thereby damaging my character.

 

I will assume that Lowell Portfolio I Ltd has legally purchased this debt and appointed Lowell Financial Ltd as their agent to manage this account.

 

Lowell Portfolio I Ltd and Lowell Financial Ltd are each registered separately with the Information Commissioners Office as Data Controllers.

 

Please provide proof of a Fair Processing Notice sent to me, as the Data Subject, by Lowell Portfolio I Ltd detailing how my personal information, stored on relevant filing systems, will be used.

 

As clearly stated on the Information Commissioner’s Office own website ICO – Information Commissioner's Office :

 

Q: What do I need to put in my fair processing notice, which is given to individuals before I process their information?

 

You will need to outline what and how information is going to be processed. This is to make sure the individual knows exactly what is going to happen to their information and how it is going to be used. You shouldn't be doing anything with personal information unless the individual is made aware.

 

Please provide proof of consent given to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd to share my personal data with another Limited company, namely Lowell Financial Ltd, as defined by Data Protection Act 1998 (schedule 2. 1 The data subject has given their consent to the processing).

 

I look forward to hearing from you soon in this matter so that we may resolve it amicably.

 

If we cannot so do, I will pass the matter, but not limited to, the Information Commissioners Office as well as the Office of Fair Trading. Further legal action may be taken to correct the mistakes committed by the offences, as well as to claim compensation as detailed in the Data Protection Act 1998 (Part II, Rights of Data Subjects and Others, section 13. 1).

[tifo]

posted it ...

[isuedlowellandwon]

Looks good to me! Hope you get done what you want.

[tifo]

thanks ... i'll be following you and sueing them of course ... how can a company that doesn't own the debt issue 2 defaults?

[tifo]

received reply from OFT, pp Andy Lowther.

 

We investigate all complaints received about consumer credit licence holders and, where we have the necessary evidence, we do take appropriate action. In our initial investigation of all complaints we consider how many complaints we have received overall and how strong the evidence is to support any action. It is unlikely that a licence would be revoked on the strength of one complaint. Where we have strong evidence that unfair business practices have occurred, we may take steps to revoke or refuse the licence of the business in question. However, if we are to do this we need to take account of factors such as the number of complaints received how recent they are and how well evidenced. In cases where evidence is less strong we may issue a warning letter to the business putting it on notice that its behaviour, if repeated, will call their fitness to hold a licence into question. Any action we do take has to be proportionate. If an approach from the OFT makes a trader change its behaviour and treat consumers fairly in future, this is preferable to putting a trader out of business.

 

For your information, the general effects of sections 77-79 requires the creditor/owner (in the case of a hire agreement) under an agreement for (fixed-sum credit, running account credit and hire agreement) to provide the debtor/hirer with a copy of the executed agreement and a statement of account on request.

 

If a creditor/owner fails to comply with a valid request within a period of 12 days (not including the date of receipt of the request) he may not enforce the agreement at all. This prevents enforcement with or without a court order. If a default lasts for a month (for example a calendar month) it constitutes an offence. We understand your concerns in this matter but please do remember however that once the creditor/owner complies with the request albeit out of time, he may once again enforce the agreement.

 

A ‘true copy’ of an agreement principally consists of the terms and conditions of the agreement and the statutory content of the agreement. The name, address and signature of the debtor do not have to be provided. Additionally, the creditor must supply the total sum paid under the agreement by the debtor; the total sum which has become payable under the agreement but remains unpaid; and the total sum which is to become payable under the agreement by the debtor (the latter two must include the various amounts comprised in that total sum and the date when each is/was due). However, the copy must be a copy. It need not be exact on immaterial points, but it cannot be a conjectured reconstruction. If the trader has no original copy, the trader will have difficulty showing that he has complied with the regulation by supplying a ‘true copy’, since nobody would know what was in the original. When the trader comes to enforce the debt in court, he needs to have a signed copy of the agreement in order to enforce. As the law stands currently he cannot otherwise.

 

In the absence of a copy of the original agreement someone's liability for a debt can only lead to further query. However in circumstances like this we would view it is as unfair practice under section 25(2) (d) of the Act and relevant to licence fitness if a trader failed to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate when a debt is queried or disputed.

 

If we do take any licensing action against this trader it is likely that we would need to disclose your identity to this trader along with details of your complaint. I should therefore be grateful if you would provide me with written authorisation to disclose these details to the trader. I have enclosed a disclosure consent form for you to sign and return to me in the enclosed freepost envelope.

[InKogneeToh]

Wow Tifo!

 

Very interesting reply from the OFT and particularly the parts you have highlighted in red!

 

Not enforceable at all eh? Better than we thought!

 

Plus it reinforces what we have been saying in the consumer credit agreement thread about 'true' copies having to be just that.

 

Would you mind if I saved a copy of this letter for future reference?

 

Regards, Pam

 

P.S. How's the bedtime reading going?

[tifo]

thanks Pam,

 

Yes, the OFT here are saying they cannot enforce it even with a court order, which seems odd. What they may mean is that there is unlikely to be a court order for enforcement.

 

No, i don't mind for you to keep a copy. I have a further letter from them but that is more specific to my complaint, detailing how many they've had in total and for me to sign a release form so that the OFT can chase Lowell on my complaint. Looks like things might be getting tight for the Lowell group.

 

Surprisingly, i made the same complaint to the ICO and have had no reply from them. May send a letter.

 

Next stop, the Credit Association.

 

Bedtime reading hasn't yet started, but thanks for the info. I did mean to reply but been busy with work.

[mcuth]

received reply from OFT, pp Andy Lowther.

 

We investigate all complaints received about consumer credit licence holders and, where we have the necessary evidence, we do take appropriate action. In our initial investigation of all complaints we consider how many complaints we have received overall and how strong the evidence is to support any action. It is unlikely that a licence would be revoked on the strength of one complaint. Where we have strong evidence that unfair business practices have occurred, we may take steps to revoke or refuse the licence of the business in question. However, if we are to do this we need to take account of factors such as the number of complaints received how recent they are and how well evidenced. In cases where evidence is less strong we may issue a warning letter to the business putting it on notice that its behaviour, if repeated, will call their fitness to hold a licence into question. Any action we do take has to be proportionate. If an approach from the OFT makes a trader change its behaviour and treat consumers fairly in future, this is preferable to putting a trader out of business.

 

For your information, the general effects of sections 77-79 requires the creditor/owner (in the case of a hire agreement) under an agreement for (fixed-sum credit, running account credit and hire agreement) to provide the debtor/hirer with a copy of the executed agreement and a statement of account on request.

 

If a creditor/owner fails to comply with a valid request within a period of 12 days (not including the date of receipt of the request) he may not enforce the agreement at all. This prevents enforcement with or without a court order. If a default lasts for a month (for example a calendar month) it constitutes an offence. We understand your concerns in this matter but please do remember however that once the creditor/owner complies with the request albeit out of time, he may once again enforce the agreement.

 

A ‘true copy’ of an agreement principally consists of the terms and conditions of the agreement and the statutory content of the agreement. The name, address and signature of the debtor do not have to be provided. Additionally, the creditor must supply the total sum paid under the agreement by the debtor; the total sum which has become payable under the agreement but remains unpaid; and the total sum which is to become payable under the agreement by the debtor (the latter two must include the various amounts comprised in that total sum and the date when each is/was due). However, the copy must be a copy. It need not be exact on immaterial points, but it cannot be a conjectured reconstruction. If the trader has no original copy, the trader will have difficulty showing that he has complied with the regulation by supplying a ‘true copy’, since nobody would know what was in the original. When the trader comes to enforce the debt in court, he needs to have a signed copy of the agreement in order to enforce. As the law stands currently he cannot otherwise.

 

In the absence of a copy of the original agreement someone's liability for a debt can only lead to further query. However in circumstances like this we would view it is as unfair practice under section 25(2) (d) of the Act and relevant to licence fitness if a trader failed to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate when a debt is queried or disputed.

 

If we do take any licensing action against this trader it is likely that we would need to disclose your identity to this trader along with details of your complaint. I should therefore be grateful if you would provide me with written authorisation to disclose these details to the trader. I have enclosed a disclosure consent form for you to sign and return to me in the enclosed freepost envelope.

 

Niiiiiiiiiiiice - very useful to everyone else too, thanks for that

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[tamadus]

That's a wonderful reply from them and verifies much of the Consumer Credit agreements thread, thanks Tifo

[OneStepLeft]

A ‘true copy’ of an agreement principally consists of the terms and conditions of the agreement and the statutory content of the agreement. The name, address and signature of the debtor do not have to be provided.

 

Based on that, a reply to a CCA (considering many are sent when a DCA starts hassling someone who is not the original debtor) may not even prove that the debtor being pursued is actually the debtor at all? If that is the case what is the benefit of a successful request for a CCA?

[tifo]

Based on that, a reply to a CCA (considering many are sent when a DCA starts hassling someone who is not the original debtor) may not even prove that the debtor being pursued is actually the debtor at all? If that is the case what is the benefit of a successful request for a CCA?

 

Yes, it needs clarifying from the OFT as to what they mean exactly.

 

But my complaint goes further than the CCA, Lowell Financial have issued 2 defaults when they are not even the creditor. Lowell Portfolio I are and they have issued 2 defaults of their own.

 

So my case case against Lowell Portfolio is they have wrongly issued an additional default, plus the info is wrong, causing me distress.

 

My case against Lowell Financial is that they have no right to issue any defaults, so they are causing me unnecessary distress. I am sure they have breached many guidelines here, misusing personal info under the DPA being one.

[OneStepLeft]

Yes, it needs clarifying from the OFT as to what they mean exactly.

 

But my complaint goes further than the CCA, Lowell Financial have issued 2 defaults when they are not even the creditor. Lowell Portfolio I are and they have issued 2 defaults of their own.

 

So my case case against Lowell Portfolio is they have wrongly issued an additional default, plus the info is wrong, causing me distress.

 

My case against Lowell Financial is that they have no right to issue any defaults, so they are causing me unnecessary distress. I am sure they have breached many guidelines here, misusing personal info under the Data Protection Act being one.

 

Hi tifo,

 

Yes, you certainly have more than sufficient ammunition with which to pursue Lowell on different but related matter, but in the grand scheme of things, a Creditor or DCA could actually comply with a CCA request and not actually benefit the consumer at all. The only reason this is an issue is because the general consensus and advice given out generally seems to be that sending a CCA request will get you a great deal more than the OFT is suggesting it can.

 

Of course in the majority of cases those receiving CCA's either comply with more than they should (or so it would appear), or do not provide even the minimum requested and therefore default.

 

You are correct though, clarity is needed.

[tifo]

sending the following letter today :

 

Further to my letter of the 29th January 2007, to which I have not received a reply.

 

It has come to my attention that Lowell Financial Ltd have entered two defaults on my credit files relating to the above account. The credit file information also contains incorrect information.

 

You will be aware that only one default can be active per account at any time. However, I understand that only the creditor can enter this information. Please explain why, not being the creditor, Lowell Financial Ltd has entered two defaults on my credit file, causing me considerable damage and distress.

 

This is a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 (failing to process accurate information and processing without consent) as well as the Human Rights Act 1998 (this is a breach of my right of privacy under article)8).

 

As you are aware, I am afforded principled rights under the Data Protection Act (Data Protection Act), Schedule 1, Part 1 ("The Principles") in relation to the manner in which my data is collated, stored and processed. Of particular note, are Principles 3 and 4 :

 

3. Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed.

 

4. Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.

 

As Lowell Financial Ltd has never owned this debt because they have been appointed to manage it only by Lowell Portfolio I Ltd, then they have breached Principles 3 and 4 (stated above), because issuing a default on an account that is not owned is not relevant and is excessive. Furthermore, it is not an accurate use of personal data which is a core responsibility of your company’s Data Controller.

 

Section 10(1)(a) and (b) of the Data Protection Act is also very clear as to the rights of the Data Subject in respect of damage and distress caused by the use of personal information :

10. - (1) (a) the processing of those data or their processing for that purpose or in that manner is causing or is likely to cause substantial damage or substantial distress to him or to another, and

 

(b) that damage or distress is or would be unwarranted.

 

In this case, as Lowell Financial Ltd has never been the actual creditor for this account then they have breached the above subsections of the Act, in that the default issued under their name has caused considerable damage to my financial credibility as well as distress in paying higher rates of interest on my mortgage or loans. As such this is unwarranted. I am currently paying £104 per month extra on my mortgage which is a result of these defaults on my credit files.

 

Please provide proof of a Fair Processing Notice sent to me, as the Data Subject, by Lowell Financial Ltd detailing how my personal information, stored on relevant filing systems, will be used.

 

As clearly stated on the Information Commissioner’s Office own website ICO – Information Commissioner's Office :

 

Q: What do I need to put in my fair processing notice, which is given to individuals before I process their information?

 

You will need to outline what and how information is going to be processed. This is to make sure the individual knows exactly what is going to happen to their information and how it is going to be used. You shouldn't be doing anything with personal information unless the individual is made aware.

 

Please provide proof of consent given to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd to share my personal data with another Limited company, namely Lowell Financial Ltd, as defined by Data Protection Act 1998 (schedule 2. 1 The data subject has given their consent to the processing).

 

For your information, the matter has been passed to the following for investigation :

 

1. The Office of Fair Trading who are investigating the matter at the moment to establish whether it is a breach of your credit license.

 

2. The Information Commissioners Office as this is a breach of the Data Protection Act and they are also investigating the matter.

 

3. The Credit Services Association who are looking into the matter to establish if it breaches their guidelines.

 

4. Barclays Bank, who were the original creditor of this account. They are looking into the matter.

 

5. Trading Standards who will investigate the issues I have raised.

 

I would ask that Lowell Financial Ltd fully investigate the many breaches that have occurred on this account by their company.

 

I then expect a full apology and compensation for damage and distress caused by the issue of these defaults, as detailed in the Data Protection Act 1998 (Part II, Rights of Data Subjects and Others, section 13. 1). Any amount offered should fully take into account the distress of having to pay an additional sum of £104 per month extra on my mortgage, taking into account the date the default was entered and the effect of two defaults as opposed to only one. The two defaults would be required to be completely removed and not merely amended.

 

If Lowell Financial Ltd do not respond, or do not respond positively, to my request, then legal action may be taken to correct the mistakes committed by the offences, as well as to claim compensation for damage and distress caused. You will additionally be liable for mine and the court costs.

 

I look forward to hearing from you soon in this matter so that we may resolve it amicably.

[InKogneeToh]

Hi Tifo

 

Great letter! I wonder which company will respond to this - if at all!!

 

Regards, Pam

[payingonlyencouragesthem]

"For your information, the general effects of sections 77-79 requires the creditor/owner (in the case of a hire agreement) under an agreement for (fixed-sum credit, running account credit and hire agreement) to provide the debtor/hirer with a copy of the executed agreement and a statement of account on request."

 

I just noticed this - it seems to clear up the long standing question mark over whether or not overdrafts are included in s 77-79. Looks like they are. Brilliant work tifo!

[tifo]

the first letter is to Lowell Financial Ltd, this one below is for Lowell Portfolio I Ltd (slightly different as they have been assigned the account, but not proven it (i have letter from bank)).

 

Further to my letter of the 29th January 2007, to which I have not received a reply.

It has come to my attention that Lowell Portfolio I Ltd have entered two defaults on my credit files relating to the above account. The credit file information also contains incorrect information.

You will be aware that only one default can be active per account at any time. However, I understand that only the creditor can enter this information. As my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 78(1) has not been fulfilled, Lowell Portfolio I Ltd have not yet proven that they are the creditor for this account.

This is how the Consumer Credit Act defines a creditor :

189 Definitions

 

(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires—

 

”creditor” means the person providing credit under a consumer credit agreement or the person to whom his rights and duties under the agreement have passed by assignment or operation of law, and in relation to a prospective consumer credit agreement, includes the prospective creditor;

 

This to me defines the legal owner of the debt, whether that be the original creditor, or a Debt Agency who has 'bought' the debt.

This is a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 (failing to process accurate information and processing without consent) as well as the Human Rights Act 1998 (this is a breach of my right of privacy under article 8).

As you are aware, I am afforded principled rights under the Data Protection Act (Data Protection Act), Schedule 1, Part 1 ("The Principles") in relation to the manner in which my data is collated, stored and processed. Of particular note, are Principles 3 and 4 :

3. Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed.

 

4. Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.

 

I understand that Lowell Portfolio I Ltd may have been assigned this debt and may be the creditor, but they have still breached Principles 3 and 4 (stated above), because issuing two defaults on one account with incorrect information is not relevant and is excessive. Furthermore, it is not an accurate use of personal data which is a core responsibility of your company’s Data Controller.

 

Section 10(1)(a) and (b) of the Data Protection Act is also very clear as to the rights of the Data Subject in respect of damage and distress caused by the use of personal information :

10. - (1) (a) the processing of those data or their processing for that purpose or in that manner is causing or is likely to cause substantial damage or substantial distress to him or to another, and

 

(b) that damage or distress is or would be unwarranted.

 

In this case, Lowell Portfolio I Ltd have breached the above subsections of the Act, in that the two defaults issued under their name have caused considerable damage to my financial credibility as well as distress in paying higher rates of interest on my mortgage or loans. As such this is unwarranted. I am currently paying £104 per month extra on my mortgage which is a result of these defaults on my credit files.

Please provide proof of a Fair Processing Notice sent to me, as the Data Subject, by Lowell Portfolio I Ltd detailing how my personal information, stored on relevant filing systems, will be used.

As clearly stated on the Information Commissioner’s Office own website ICO – Information Commissioner's Office :

 

Q: What do I need to put in my fair processing notice, which is given to individuals before I process their information?

 

You will need to outline what and how information is going to be processed. This is to make sure the individual knows exactly what is going to happen to their information and how it is going to be used. You shouldn't be doing anything with personal information unless the individual is made aware.

 

Please provide proof of consent given to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd to share my personal data with another Limited company, namely Lowell Financial Ltd, as defined by Data Protection Act 1998 (schedule 2. 1 The data subject has given their consent to the processing).

For your information, the matter has been passed to the following for investigation :

1. The Office of Fair Trading who are investigating the matter at the moment to establish whether it is a breach of your credit license.

2. The Information Commissioners Office as this is a breach of the Data Protection Act and they are also investigating the matter.

3. The Credit Services Association who are looking into the matter to establish if it breaches their guidelines.

4. Barclays Bank, who were the original creditor of this account. They are looking into the matter.

5. Trading Standards who will investigate the issues I have raised.

I would ask that Lowell Portfolio I Ltd fully investigate the many breaches that have occurred on this account by their company.

I then expect a full apology and compensation for damage and distress caused by the issue of these defaults, as detailed in the Data Protection Act 1998 (Part II, Rights of Data Subjects and Others, section 13. 1). Any amount offered should fully take into account the distress of having to pay an additional sum of £104 per month extra on my mortgage, taking into account the date the defaults were entered and the effect of two defaults as opposed to only one. The two defaults would be required to be completely removed and not merely amended, as Lowell Portfolio I Ltd have not yet proven that they are the creditor for this account.

If Lowell Portfolio I Ltd do not respond, or do not respond positively, to my request, then legal action may be taken to correct the mistakes committed by the offences, as well as to claim compensation for damage and distress caused. You will additionally be liable for court costs as well as my costs in bringing any action.

I look forward to hearing from you soon in this matter so that we may resolve it amicably.

[OneStepLeft]

"For your information, the general effects of sections 77-79 requires the creditor/owner (in the case of a hire agreement) under an agreement for (fixed-sum credit, running account credit and hire agreement) to provide the debtor/hirer with a copy of the executed agreement and a statement of account on request."

 

I just noticed this - it seems to clear up the long standing question mark over whether or not overdrafts are included in s 77-79. Looks like they are. Brilliant work tifo!

 

Ah yes, this is extremely relevant to me at this point in time. Fantastic.

[InKogneeToh]

"For your information, the general effects of sections 77-79 requires the creditor/owner (in the case of a hire agreement) under an agreement for (fixed-sum credit, running account credit and hire agreement) to provide the debtor/hirer with a copy of the executed agreement and a statement of account on request."

 

I just noticed this - it seems to clear up the long standing question mark over whether or not overdrafts are included in s 77-79. Looks like they are. Brilliant work tifo!

 

Hi

 

Basically overdrafts are running account credit agreements covered in general by the CCA but are (by virtue of s74) exempt from Part V of the Act.

 

Therefore there is no requirement for a formal agreement and so nothing would be forthcoming under a s78 request. The banks only have to notify you in writing of your OD limit, interest rate and procedure for termination when you are granted an authorised OD. There would be no reason to send a statement under s78 either as you receive these monthly or on request anyway.

 

Regards, Pam