CCA Agreements (Mark II) PLUS any other topic

[InKogneeToh]

HI

On Hallowed turf here so got to be careful;)

 

I dont think that using the incorrect word would e enought ot have the agreement declared unenforceaable as this is a matter of form not content and specifically not one of the criteria mentioned in section127.

 

Sorry

Peter

 

Hi

 

For once I unreservedly agree with you Peter! (this is becoming a bad habit!)

 

It is the amount and frequency of the payments themselves that is the prescribed term, not the word used to express 'repayment'. E.g. I have seen 'payment', 'repayment' and 'instalment' used in different agreements.

 

Similarly, the prescribed term 'Amount of Credit' is sometimes expressed as 'amount of loan' or total advance' or similar. It is not those words that constitute the prescribed term. it is the figure (sum) that is shown against this entry that is the (prescribed) 'term' of the agreement.

 

P.S. You might want to enlarge this post Peter and get a special frame as a centre piece to the other two since this is an 'unreserved' agreement with your opinion!! :grin::grin:

 

Regards, Pam

[Peterbard]

Hi Pam

 

No more plques ,making to many errors myself just lately and someone else might pick up on the idea.

(Oh and by the way it was 3 not that i was counting)

 

Regards

 

Peter

 

Ps don't you think my spelling is improving?

[InKogneeToh]

Well, having said that I was not going to post any more in the other Consumer Credit Agreement thread I'm afraid I have back-tracked on that, but only because I have been following it and recently noticed some people planning to tell their creditors that their agreements were unenforceable when in actual fact they are not 'unenforceable' but 'improperly executed'!

 

Also, I had said I would not post in that thread again until I had received a proper response from the MODS regarding the issues that arose last weekend but I guess that is never going to happen!

 

I wonder if one of the MODS watching this thread (as I am sure they are) would consider doing something much more useful by making a sticky of the links to the OFT docs 'cancellable agreements (2003), 'non-cancellable agreements (2003) and the CCA FAQs doc (2004), so that they are all easily accessible for people to check their agreements against.

 

Regards, Pam

[InKogneeToh]

(Oh and by the way it was 3 not that i was counting)

 

 

THAT many?!? GULP!!

 

My street cred is now severely damaged!!

 

And yes your spelling is a 'tad' better (I suppose )

[Peterbard]

Well, having said that I was not going to post any more in the other Consumer Credit Agreement thread I'm afraid I have back-tracked on that, but only because I have been following it and recently noticed some people planning to tell their creditors that their agreements were unenforceable when in actual fact they are not 'unenforceable' but 'improperly executed'!

 

Also, I had said I would not post in that thread again until I had received a proper response from the MODS regarding the issues that arose last weekend but I guess that is never going to happen!

 

I wonder if one of the MODS watching this thread (as I am sure they are) would consider doing something much more useful by making a sticky of the links to the OFT docs 'cancellable agreements (2003), 'non-cancellable agreements (2003) and the CCA FAQs doc (2004), so that they are all easily accessible for people to check their agreements against.

 

Regards, Pam

 

Hi Pam

 

Good to have you back, like has been said a hundred times we are all here to learn. One of the things we have to learn is how to query each others posts without giving offence, and also being able to take correction without getting bent out of shape, i am as guilty of this as any one and it is very none productive but i am learning.

I Think your concise and dogmatic approach to problem solving is a great asset to the forum, as to the idea of giving a link to the information i am not so sure, many people who come on here are not sure what it is they are looking for and need the personal approach. i know you get inundated with pMs as do i and a lot of them are due to the fact that newcomers are reluctant to post on the forum.

Perhaps we should consentrate on being more user friendly.

 

Regards

Peter

[surprise]

I would just like to add a thank you for all those who give so much to these forums and for all the information I have gleaned on this site, particularly this one, and the other CCA Thread. I have just managed to help my daughter out of a sticky hole, post #167 on defaults. GE Money have tried to pull a flanker on her, dated their default notice 8th April 07 - which incidentally was Easter Sunday, so there was no collection until 10th April, she didn't actually receive it until 13th April, it included penalty charges, and they wanted settlement by 22nd April 07. The only reason she didn't pay was the car has been in garage since 5th March and the cost is £2,500 and no one wants to take responsibility.

 

I'm not sure how she really does stand legally on this one, I'm of the opinion that she should carry on paying. Notice of Termination dated 8th April 07 same day as the default notice, but this was received after the Default Notice. Seems odd to me. Any comments on how she stands would be appreciated.

[djdave]

Can anybody lend a second opinion on this:

 

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s185/djdave2007/lo_res_scan_blanked_1024.jpg

 

Agreement, or application form? I think I know the answer. I hope I know the answer! But I want to see if anybody agrees with me

 

Cheers

[Peterbard]

I would just like to add a thank you for all those who give so much to these forums and for all the information I have gleaned on this site, particularly this one, and the other CCA Thread. I have just managed to help my daughter out of a sticky hole, post #167 on defaults. GE Money have tried to pull a flanker on her, dated their default notice 8th April 07 - which incidentally was Easter Sunday, so there was no collection until 10th April, she didn't actually receive it until 13th April, it included penalty charges, and they wanted settlement by 22nd April 07. The only reason she didn't pay was the car has been in garage since 5th March and the cost is £2,500 and no one wants to take responsibility.

 

I'm not sure how she really does stand legally on this one, I'm of the opinion that she should carry on paying. Notice of Termination dated 8th April 07 same day as the default notice, but this was received after the Default Notice. Seems odd to me. Any comments on how she stands would be appreciated.

 

hI

I havn't read your thread yet so forgive me if ths is old ground but you are aware that the default if commited after june 2006 will come under the 2006 CCA(this acts retrospectively) this gives you 14 days from the date of the default and also you were entitled to a notice of arrears prior to that and also a notification of any default charges you should also check these on your agreement.

I returned my car to GE under section 100 of the act and know exactly what ou mean about their tactics,take my advice and believe nothng they say unless the can show you the legislature. I got them to back down from a bill for over £2000 by sticking to my guns don't let them intimidate you PM me if you like and let me know how you get on

 

Regards

Peter

[surprise]

Hi, thanks for the offer. She has received any correspondence from them other than the Default Notice dated 8th April and Notice of Termination 8th April. She only stopped paying because of nobody taking responsibility for the repair. She bought the car 30.6.06 and the oil seal leaked oil into the turbo on 5th March 07. Since which time she has run round in circles between, Ford, Garage and GE Money. I took in on Yesterday for her and I have written to all 3 now, I have also pointed out to GE Money the errors of their ways. I've given them 5 days to respond.

[Peterbard]

Can anybody lend a second opinion on this:

 

http://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s185/djdave2007/lo_res_scan_blanked_1024.jpg

 

Agreement, or application form? I think I know the answer. I hope I know the answer! But I want to see if anybody agrees with me

 

Cheers

 

Hi

Its an application form it says on the top, and according to our friend at the OFT an application form will not be acceptqale in a court instead of an agreement.

A copy of the letter from the OFT is on the other thread.

This must be the worst excuse for executed copy i have seen i see no prescribed trms and it doesn't even pretend to fill any of the form or content requirments.

Send it back and ask them for a copy of the agreement tell them you will not pay any more on the alleged acount untill you have one, remind them of the timescale for production that they are in default after 12 working days and after a further month have commited an offence and that the shoul not transfer any data to any outside source whilst the acount is in default nor accrue any interest to the account.

Best regards

Peter

[davefirewalker]

No peter if you want to see aREALLY crap agreement

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-763464.html

 

now thats crap

 

Dave

[djdave]

Hi

Its an application form it says on the top...

This must be the worst excuse for executed copy i have seen i see no prescribed trms and it doesn't even pretend to fill any of the form or content requirments.Best regards

Peter

 

Exactly as I thought, but thanks for your opinion

 

No peter if you want to see aREALLY crap agreement

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-763464.html

 

now thats crap

 

Dave

 

Maybe we should start a competition: which DCA can send the worst excuse for an agreement?

[yaffsimone1]

I got an 'agreement' through this morning from GE Capital. I have spotted errors already like the fact it is not signed or dated by them. The account number is not even mine and the marketing info box is not ticked and if im signing agreements i ALWAYS tick it. Its also got a sort code in the financial details section but no account number. I do think its one they have 'slung' together. I have only got one page and it is photocopied. What else should i be looking for?

[yaffsimone1]

I got an 'agreement' through this morning from GE Capital. I have spotted errors already like the fact it is not signed or dated by them. The account number is not even mine and the marketing info box is not ticked and if im signing agreements i ALWAYS tick it. Its also got a sort code in the financial details section but no account number. I do think its one they have 'slung' together. I have only got one page and it is photocopied. What else should i be looking for?

 

I have just spotted something at the top it says 'Credit Agreement Regulated by The Consumer Credit Act 1974'

 

Right hand side it says 'By signing this application form you consent to.....'

 

Then at the very bottom it where it has a dodgy signature of mine it says' This is a Credit Agreement Regulated blah blah...'

 

Well what is it an Agreement or Application because it clearly states that it is both!

[Cornucopia]

Exactly as I thought, but thanks for your opinion

 

 

 

Maybe we should start a competition: which DCA can send the worst excuse for an agreement?

 

I have to say djdave, that I would win that one hands down - you'll have to take my word on it though!

 

I mentioned earlier in the thread my Goldfish agreement, another case of reconstructed conjecture! However, they have surpassed themselves today! They sent me this document a few days ago. Today, I was struggling to get into the front door when I got home from work. Well, you couldn't have made it up. They have sent me SIXTY ONE of the same agreement in 61 separate envelopes with 61 information leaflets. The poor postman must have wondered what was going on!

 

I must be a VERY lucky girl, that Goldfish have got 61 copies of my "true executed agreement"!! LOL!!

[humbleman]

I have to say djdave, that I would win that one hands down - you'll have to take my word on it though!

 

I mentioned earlier in the thread my Goldfish agreement, another case of reconstructed conjecture! However, they have surpassed themselves today! They sent me this document a few days ago. Today, I was struggling to get into the front door when I got home from work. Well, you couldn't have made it up. They have sent me SIXTY ONE of the same agreement in 61 separate envelopes with 61 information leaflets. The poor postman must have wondered what was going on!

 

I must be a VERY lucky girl, that Goldfish have got 61 copies of my "true executed agreement"!! LOL!!

 

I'd check your credit file incase they got 61 accounts registered on there LOL

[djdave]

61? Are any of them valid?

[Perseus]

Just make sure you haven't been charged a quid for each one

RROFLMFAO !!! :o

[Cornucopia]

61? Are any of them valid?

 

It's hilarious isn't it?! From what I can see, they are all differently numbered (ie : the actual stationery is numbered and is nice and crisp and fresh). This account was opened in around 92'. It cannot be valid because I didn't live at this address then (and each have my current address on), they are all dated the 23rd of April 2007 (the one they sent me last week was dated 17 April 2007). It has the current rate of interest, the current rate of charges (ie : £12.00, up to September though they were charging £20.00) and there are no signature boxes, or room for them, no signatures from either party and only a cancellation box. Another case of "here's one I made earlier".....or 61 as the case may be!!!:grin: They've been watching too much Blue Peter!!!

 

I wonder if I will get 61 responses to my letter back to them!!!

 

That is a valid point Pers, what is a quid divided by 61 - what a BARGAIN!!!! LOL!!!

[Tigs33]

It's hilarious isn't it?! From what I can see, they are all differently numbered (ie : the actual stationery is numbered and is nice and crisp and fresh). This account was opened in around 92'. It cannot be valid because I didn't live at this address then (and each have my current address on), they are all dated the 23rd of April 2007 (the one they sent me last week was dated 17 April 2007). It has the current rate of interest, the current rate of charges (ie : £12.00, up to September though they were charging £20.00) and there are no signature boxes, or room for them, no signatures from either party and only a cancellation box. Another case of "here's one I made earlier".....or 61 as the case may be!!!:grin: They've been watching too much Blue Peter!!!

 

I wonder if I will get 61 responses to my letter back to them!!!

 

That is a valid point Pers, what is a quid divided by 61 - what a BARGAIN!!!! LOL!!!

 

Oh my!!!! somebody knew what they were doing in their office!!!

 

Classic

[santos ehelper]

Hi all

 

Just had something interesting in todays post from capital one, I know there is alot of bad feeling against them but I think that they are trying to be the good guys now.

 

I sent off my general letter to all my creditors about financial difficulties and they each replied with numerous default notices, all except capital one who replied with

 

" Santos, sorry to hear about you financial troubles but you forgot to sign the letter so for security reasons will you send another one and sign it and we will assess your situation from there, yours, capital one"

 

So I get in from work and there is a letter from cap one saying that as from 1st june all account holders will be subject to a new credit agreement and they enclose a big sheet of paper with every term and condition you could ever imagine and say you do not have to act on anything or sign anything it will all just come into effect from the above date.

 

Best bit about the covering letter though was the paragraph that reads.

 

" as of 1st june all capital one customers are to receive free,( yes free, )payment protection cover on all card accounts"

 

Whats that all about?

 

Santos

[davefirewalker]

wow

 

theyre up to something

 

Dave

[santos ehelper]

I think you are right Dave,

 

Seems very strange, ( thinks twilight zone music )

 

Santos

[Cornucopia]

Hi all

 

Just had something interesting in todays post from capital one, I know there is alot of bad feeling against them but I think that they are trying to be the good guys now.

 

I sent off my general letter to all my creditors about financial difficulties and they each replied with numerous default notices, all except capital one who replied with

 

" Santos, sorry to hear about you financial troubles but you forgot to sign the letter so for security reasons will you send another one and sign it and we will assess your situation from there, yours, capital one"

 

So I get in from work and there is a letter from cap one saying that as from 1st june all account holders will be subject to a new credit agreement and they enclose a big sheet of paper with every term and condition you could ever imagine and say you do not have to act on anything or sign anything it will all just come into effect from the above date.

 

Best bit about the covering letter though was the paragraph that reads.

 

" as of 1st june all capital one customers are to receive free,( yes free, )payment protection cover on all card accounts"

 

Whats that all about?

 

Santos

 

Hi Santos! How ODD, but surely for them to be able to have a true executed agreement, they can't just send it to you and say "this is it", surely they would need signatures from both parties! Well that's how I seee it.

 

As they say, nothing in life is free, so expect to be paying for their generosity in the form of an annual fee, increased interest rates, etc etc!

 

Also, it will no doubt be so full of get out clauses that if you get so much as a zit on your chin, that will be enough to strike out your claim!

 

I didn't realise I was such a cynical so and so!:grin:

[santos ehelper]

Oops

 

Just read it again and the ppi it is referring to is Purchase Protection Insurance, not Payment Protection Insurance as I previously stated so it is really something we already had under the VISA brand.

 

As for the new terms and conditions etc I dont have a clue what all that is about, just a lot of gobble de gook.

 

Maybe some other cap one customers can explain it better, presuming they all got the same letter?

 

Santos