Intrum Justitia Arghhhhhh, help please

[Peterbard]

Honest Pam

[Peterbard]

Never mention it again Pam

[Peterbard]

No siree not me pam not a peep;)

[nannamoon1]

Does anyone else think they are likely to take the matter to court, this has taken the edge off my smile now:confused:

 

rinkydinkydoo,

 

They are unable to take you to court, because they would have to supply the original agreement to prove the debt.... which they do not have, I think they are trying to bully you...if the 12 days plus one month have passed, they have committed a criminal offence....

 

Until they produce the agreement the debt is in dispute in any case...

 

I hope this helps

 

nannamoon1

[rinkydinkydoo]

Thanks nanamoon, the 12 day plus one month will be up in a week or so, thank god for that, I would dread having to go to court, it would give me the jitters.

 

But hey, its not the end of the world:)

[ODC]

I agree with nanamoon . They would need the original document to prove you actuallly owe them any money.

 

The court would require proof of a debt.

 

You have made a lawful request for proof of the debt. They cannot produce it so tough titty Activ.

[poochball]

Hi,

 

Personally, I still think they can take you to court because there are other means of proving the debt exists. As to the weight of these means is beyond my knowledge but there are possible ways.

 

Most companies simpy would not go to court because you made a request under the Consumer Credit Act for a copy of your agreement and as they have defaulted on this agreement, they are not entitled to enforce the debt. It also makes them look very bad and they risk a fine.

 

As for none compliance being a criminal offence, I am not so sure of that as from my reading of the Consumer Credit Act the wording is that the creditor commits and offence with no mention of it being a criminal offence.

 

To be honest, I think Aktiv will give up .

 

I am just offering my view of things so take it as you please.

[rinkydinkydoo]

Hi,

 

Personally, I still think they can take you to court because there are other means of proving the debt exists. As to the weight of these means is beyond my knowledge but there are possible ways.

 

Most companies simpy would not go to court because you made a request under the Consumer Credit Act for a copy of your agreement and as they have defaulted on this agreement, they are not entitled to enforce the debt. It also makes them look very bad and they risk a fine.

 

As for none compliance being a criminal offence, I am not so sure of that as from my reading of the Consumer Credit Act the wording is that the creditor commits and offence with no mention of it being a criminal offence.

 

To be honest, I think Aktiv will give up .

 

I am just offering my view of things so take it as you please.

 

 

Hi, can anyone further explain the bit I have highlighted, does anyone know how a debt can be proved in any other way than having a fully complete cca with all the requirements,

Regards, Rinky:?

[PriorityOne]

Don't worry about it.....

 

In theory, although a company may take you to court whilst being in default of your legal request for a CCA... they cannot have the debt re-enforced in court without this document. A Deed of Assignment can prove the existence of a debt (if a DCA has bought it)... but the CCA is needed for enforcement. This is why people don't go after a non-complying DCA for a refund.... they can prove the debt exists with a D of A.

 

Without a CCA, court action would be a waste of time for a DCA.

 

The CCA, 1974 is quite clear.... whilst a creditor remains in default of your request, they cannot enforce payment. The "criminal offence" bit comes in if they continue to harrass you for payment whilst being in default after 12 working days and one calendar month and they can be reported for this.

 

[rinkydinkydoo]

Thanks priorotyone,

[tiglet]

Just subscribing - morning everyone x