Capquest unsure what to do next

[stivis]

I did the following

Sent off on 29 November 2006 a SAR letter

Sent off on 29 December 2006 a CCA letter

Also sent of to Halifax on 4 January 2007 a CCA letter

All recorded delivery with payment in Pos

The amount is from Halifax last statement 3750

Capquests demands are 7890 then dropped to 7600 then to 7300now back to 7890

To the three above letter I have not received and reply or details

Since Tuesday I have been getting the phonecalls again from Capquest

I have now got from Capquest today, the CCA but no Deed of Assignment What do I do ?

[neil1821]

Capquest are totally out of order here again. :evil:

 

1. If you sent a CCA request back in Dec, they have certainly defaulted and committed an offence by now. Any debt should now be completely unenforceable.

 

2. No Deed of Assignment, therefore they still haven't complied fully with your CCA (not that that should matter considering what I said above).

 

3. I would argue that if they are still pursuing you on this, then it amounts to harrassment.

 

Hopefully someone else who knows a bit more can advise you what to do, but I'd certainly consider sending them the letter about harrassment (look through the templates).

 

Neil

[allykat]

hey there, the harrassment by telephone letter can be found here -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/37006-harassment-telephone-response-letter.html

 

As for the failure to provide the CCA as you requested, there is a letter somewhere on this lovely site, (can't find it for the life of me!) but it's the one you send when they fail to comply with the CCA request anyway.

 

Sorry I can't help further, but at least this will bump up the thread for you, hopefully someone will come along with more info

[alanfromderby]

Is the credit agreement a true copy of the original, and containing all the required elements?

 

If so, then it is possible that Capquest are no longer in default.

 

Yes, they may have committed an offence under the CCA, and they could be reported to Trading Standards. However, it is possible that the agreement is now enforceable.

 

Certainly it is not a clear-cut situation, and until a court gives a ruling on whether a lender having committed an offence, also makes the agreement permanently unenforceable, it is dangerous to assume that it is.

 

Also, as far as I am aware, and I stand to be corrected on this, sections 77(1) and 78(1) do not include a requirement to provide a copy of the deed of assignment.

 

However, it is reasonable that they do supply proof of title (ie. the deed of assignment) - and it could be seen as reasonable that you do not enter into discussions on settlement terms without seeing that proof of title.

[neil1821]

I defer to your better informed opinion Alan

 

But can I then ask you a question? If after you CCA them they can blithely ignore you, default after 12 days, commit an offence after a further month, and yet still pursue you 3-4 months afterwards, then what exactly is the point of the 12 day/42 day time limits on this?

 

It would seem that there is no great necessity for them to obey the time limits then?

 

Neil

[alanfromderby]

I defer to your better informed opinion Alan

 

But can I then ask you a question? If after you CCA them they can blithely ignore you, default after 12 days, commit an offence after a further month, and yet still pursue you 3-4 months afterwards, then what exactly is the point of the 12 day/42 day time limits on this?

 

It would seem that there is no great necessity for them to obey the time limits then?

 

Neil

 

I am not saying that they would necessarily have an easy ride in court, but you have to be very careful when venturing into untested waters.

 

It is one thing being able to show that an offence has been committed under the Act, it is another to assume that the punishment for that offence would be the total unenforceability of the agreement.

 

Clearly, if they have not got the agreement, or if it fails to meet the requirements of being a properly executed agreement, then that renders it totally unenforceable.

 

In a case where the document was later found, within a reasonable timescale, I would suspect that a judge MAY allow it to stand.

 

In this case we are talking of about a 6-week delay. My guess is that they would ask the judge to accept that they have been inundated with requests for these documents, and therefore it took longer than normal to complete the search.

 

Of course, this all relies on Capquest making the decision that it is financially viable to go through with a court claim. This depends on whether the debtor is working, has any property to levy a charge upon, or they believe they can successfully use any other means of enforcement.

 

Unfortunately the OP has not given a great deal of information, other than the time line.

[stivis]

I have already sent a harrassment letter that has been ignored , I also asked all correspondance was sent to my solicitor, for no other reason than It looks good , the CCA is with the Leeds , which was taken over by the Halifax, I also sent the DPA/SAR letter to the Halifax and have had no reply it was sent same day as the one to Carquest. because of the differences in the amounts I was going to send another dispute letter , Ideally I'd like it back to the Halifax ,