1st Credit

[diddydicky]

Have you ever know them to close an account due to our pressure like this?

 

My claim to CAG glory so far is making Crudite Sulutions close an account . It is possibly still flying around tho as Robinsin wee tried it on with me later and I told them to go away.

 

Like you, I only wish to conclude all debts alleged or true ones at that.

 

well if they have a dodgy agreement THEN a dodgy DN and THEN an unlawful termination then yes very good chance of asking the to write it off

 

but it takes time

[questioner]

well if they have a dodgy agreement THEN a dodgy DN and THEN an unlawful termination then yes very good chance of asking the to write it off

 

but it takes time

 

I get the dodgy agreement bit (illegable and all that jazz) but not sure about the other thinbs you mention. DN? = DEFAULT NOTICE - what does that do or not do?

 

and "unlawful termination"? I thought that was what we wanted - them to terminate the account so it was closed. I must seem stupid to you. sorry.

 

Plesae excuse my ignorance but I am trying to get the handle on it all. All sounds like light at the end of this dark tunnel tho

 

 

I wonder tho why they entered into dodgy agreements in the fits place? Do they not realise the trouble this will possibly create for them later on?

[diddydicky]

Ok if they were to issue a VALID DN, against a valid CCA that is to say one that is set out properly, identifies the correct amount of arrears and gives you the required 14 days from date of service to remedy the breach AND YOU DON'T- the they are legally entitled to terminate the agreement and they will have a watertight case against you in court to sue you for the full balance,

 

If they have a defective CCA but are correct with the DN and TN then you would only have the dodgy CCA to negotiate a F & F with and they are naturally going to dispute that it is dodgy,

 

Now, irrespective of whether the agreement is or is not valid- if they SCREW UP on the DN and don't get the things i mentioned above right- then the resulting termination is likely to be unlawful

 

If they UNLAWFULLY terminate the agreement then they CANNOT then claim that you pay them the outstanding balance of the account (in other words claim the benefits of s87) ONLY the arrears that were due when they terminated.

 

Against this however may be a counterclaim by you effectively wiping that amount out and perhaps your claim even is MORE than the arrears

 

 

They KNOW that it is much harder to defend a dodgy DN. followed by an unlawful termination and that they would be on a very sticky wicket

 

so if you are negotiating a F & F and you say look,

 

you've got a dodgy agreement

a defective DN

 

and you have unlawfully terminated

 

you are much more likely to pursuade them that perhaps they should just forget the whole thing and write the debt off - doesn't always work -depends on how impressed they are i think with your knowledge up to the time you hit them with it

 

It has worked for me and worked for others

 

The reasons they entered into the dogy agreements in the first place is a whole new discussion but my take is that the "Gravy Train" was rolling so fast that they thought that the bubble would never burst ( i love doing that) and so they cut corners with their paperwork , destroyed or archived it not thinking they would ever need it again etc etc

 

LESS than the above then F & F time

[angel_1]

thank you diddydicky

 

your last post has cleared up huge worries for me now, im in combat with these but past few months ive let things run their course so to speak and now i feel i can cope with my paperwork again

 

so will dig all out and i will update all my threads over the weekend,,,

 

got a new scanner too so will be able to scan up latest letters and so forth so hoping to get some good replies on my next actions i need to take

 

have a sunny day all cheers angel x

[questioner]

Thanks DD - you have kindly showed me what a dodgy CCA is (I seem to have a few posted up on here which are hard to read) but have yet to have experience of any DN stuff.

 

----------

 

Right – I think you will love this.

 

As you know I fought Crudite Sulutions for some months and they finally closed the account – then it went to Rubinosn Wee .

 

I have today received a letter of RW with what they think is a copy of a CCA – its just 2 pages of incredibly badly copied terms and conditions from Barclaycard. And the bet bit is that they have also enclosed a letter from BC which seems to tick them off saying

 

“ As you now mange the debt it is your responsibility to provide the statement of account as required under section 78”

 

 

 

It’s rather comical as they seem to be at eachothers throat over me.

 

 

CAN POST UP IF YOU WISH

 

RW are also asking me to settle up in light of this fiasco and seem to be running around like headless chickens over this.

 

I think this explains why CS close the account

 

R Wee to have cocked up by taking it on..

Edited July 17, 2009 by questioner

[diddydicky]

Thanks DD - you have kindly showed me what a dodgy CCA is (I seem to have a few posted up on here which are hard to read) but have yet to have experience of any DN stuff.

 

----------

 

Right – I think you will love this.

 

As you know I fought Crudite Sulutions for some months and they finally closed the account – then it went to Rubinosn Wee .

 

I have today received a letter of RW with what they think is a copy of a CCA – its just 2 pages of incredibly badly copied terms and conditions from Barclaycard. And the bet bit is that they have also enclosed a letter from BC which seems to tick them off saying

 

“ As you now mange the debt it is your responsibility to provide the statement of account as required under section 78”

 

 

 

It’s rather comical as they seem to be at eachothers throat over me.

 

 

CAN POST UP IF YOU WISH

 

RW are also asking me to settle up in light of this fiasco and seem to be running around like headless chickens over this.

 

I think this explains why CS close the account

 

R Wee to have cocked up by taking it on..

 

seems like it- if it is not easily legible just throw it back at them

[questioner]

seems like it- if it is not easily legible just throw it back at them

 

 

It has nothing on but barclay terms. Looks like a truck has run over it........

 

 

[questioner]

page 2 of RW idea of a CCA request - dont think even forensics could decode this lot.

 

[questioner]

this is the ticking off from bc to rw

 

last paragraph is intersting tho

 

[questioner]

Rw have been sitting on this letter from BC since May

 

Any wonder Crudite S got shut of it?

[babybear39]

Surely they mean contain and not contact lol...

[questioner]

Surely they mean contain and not contact lol...

 

 

my thoughts too

 

so are they saying CCAs dont have to have our names on ? must be wrong surely

 

thats not a proper CCA copy

 

It looks like BC have alreday told CS to get stuffed (CS closed the account) and they in turn palmed this one off onto RW who are getting the same bog off treatment from BC now.

 

RW say I have to pay them in 10 days.

 

Now come on - this mess aint even got my name on it. I could relate to ANYONE.

Edited July 17, 2009 by questioner

[babybear39]

Just shows what a laughable shower you're up against when they can't even get a letter right

[questioner]

Just shows what a laughable shower you're up against when they can't even get a letter right

 

 

yep - and I think they will regret letteing the cat out of the bag by sending me the bollocking memo off BC too

 

they tell me a lot about why CS shut the accout.

 

RW must be thick to take it on or is all this just a cunning plan to get me fluffed?

 

are they bright enough to craft up that?

 

Now should I be just giving then the you have not honoured my CCA spin or threatening them with MORE in light of how this case is in disute and has been since Crudite S shut it?

[babybear39]

No

[questioner]

No

 

so just shortie saying IN DISPUte due to illegable mess posing as CCA ?

 

Cruel to prod them with more ?

[babybear39]

so just shortie saying IN DISPUte due to illegable mess posing as CCA ?

 

Cruel to prod them with more ?

 

Go on, you know you want to

[questioner]

Go on, you know you want to

 

 

Oooooooohh - naughty but nice

 

Ok will do

[questioner]

I almost feel mean ........

 

--------

 

 

Dear Sir/madam

 

Thank you for your reply to my request under the Consumer Credit Act section 78. In your response you confirm (16/7/09) this as a true copy of the original agreement.

 

As you must surely be aware, the poor quality documentation that you have forwarded to me does not conform to sections 60(1) and 61(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and would consequently only be enforceable by a court under s65.

 

I cannot possibly read these two sheet copies so I obviously can’t be expected to make any educated decision as to its legitimacy. They are just a sludge that any child could have created at school and in no way honour my request for a properly executed and enforceable copy of any documentation asked for.

 

Please note: Until such time that you provide me with correct ‘easily legible’ documents, in accordance with the cancellation notices and copies of documentation regulations 1983(2), you will remain in default and may not make charges or interest to the alleged account, may not enforce it or refer it to third parties and may not place adverse information with any third party about the account. Consequentially, any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS.

 

I note however that although this account is clearly in dispute you have demanded payment from me (“within 10 days.”) This demand in itself is a breach of regulations that I shall make reference to at a later date and possibly use in a formal complaint against your company if necessary, dependant on your next actions against me!

 

I must reiterate that, after harrying me for many months, CXXXX SXXXXs closed this alleged account, presumably for wise and financially logical reasons. I would politely suggest that you do the same, before your company breaches any additional guidelines that I will report to the governing bodies. The copy letter of advice from your client is highly questionable to say the least, yet I shall also be delighted to use this in future also if needs be. I politely urge you to follow the same rational route as CXXX SXXX and close this unfortunate issue immediately It has been in dispute for some time (with your failure to honour ny CCA request, s78) and clearly still is.

 

Edited July 17, 2009 by questioner

[Crapstone]

I can't wait until Dispatches 'Undercover Debt Collector' to be shown on Monday C4. 1st aren't likely to be in the party mood:)

[questioner]

I am still paying quid tokens to a few Original creditors who dont yet hassle me.

 

Now is it best to let this roll until they get sick of the accounts and sell them to DCAs BEFORE seeking CCAs or does it make no differance?

 

Not sure whether to hold fire or send in CCA requests to them.

 

Only asking as it was so comical and revealing to see RW get ticked off by Barclaycrud earlier for their ignorance over the issue.

 

.

[ronmay27]

1st time poster,sorry if posted in wrong place,1ST credit have been chasing a debt that belongs to someone with the same name as me for nearly 3 yrs now,they have used several dca to arrass me I have told them its not my debt.the person with the same name as me is from Scotland I told them that I have never lived there,the letters have stopped and started on and off with differant dca phoning me,my local MP sent them a letter they stopped for a while then started agian.

I tried to get a credit card last week and was refused when checked 1ST credit had put a default on my credit rating in may,what can i do,thanks Bri

[spark1]

Ronmay

 

Simple answer to your question: Defamation

 

A libel claimant does not have to prove that the words are false or to prove that he or she has in fact suffered any loss. Damage is presumed. Making a defamatory allegation in writing, even to one individual other than the claimant is sufficient to give rise to a claim. County Courts can award up to £10,000 in a Defamation claim.

 

My wife has just been awarded compensation by the FOS, with regards to 1st Credit. Will not elaborate to much, because I have asked for the file to reviewed by the Ombudsman, but basically what happened was similar to you, but they never entered anything on her credit file, which is a shame really, because I would of sought compensation for Defamation through the courts.

 

She has also been awarded compensation with regards to another DCA, but again I have asked for the file to be reviewed by the Ombudsman. And even better is the fact that, the ICO also found this DCA to have been in breach of the DPA. The ICO have started on the 1st Credit file, So things are unfolding nicely.

 

Spark

Edited July 18, 2009 by spark1

[ronmay27]

cheers,what do you suggest I do,thanks again

[questioner]

Spark - that news about the crudites was music to my ears.