Guidelines - Requests For An Original Agreement Under The Consumer Credit Act 1974

[means2anend]

Hi ddelo

 

My friend has received a 'doorstep' THREAT of a visit from CALDERS..are they the same as whom you are referring to above...I do know that Barclaycard are the Original Creditors and still are in the absence of any Legal Assignement..as they state at the top of their Letter Calders debt Legal rRecovery..Liverpool..etc...I wlll be back over weekend to look over your letter...mention the costs implication to them in the event that they fail to satisfy s78 and insist on taking you still to court as Claimant and you Defendant ...see Brookes v HSBC 26th March 2011..

 

I will get you the link

 

m2ae

[means2anend]

Here is the link

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?307385-CPUTR-2008-questions-and-advice....&p=3529451&viewfull=1#post3529451

[OfW0lfAndMan]

Can someone please clarify a point for me. When I make a request for an original agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, does my creditor have to provide the actual document I signed or can they provide a copy?

[hsbcfiddled]

Can someone please clarify a point for me. When I make a request for an original agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, does my creditor have to provide the actual document I signed or can they provide a copy?

 

I believe that they do not have to send the original, or a photocopy of the original, that in fact they can send what the agreement would have looked like...so u can probably guess what they will send.

I havnt been on for a while so see what others say first.

[manchestman]

HSBC is absolutely right. You are requesting a point of information, not proof or evidence. You can simply write and ask if they do in fact hold the original agreement.

If they threaten you with court action then you can use the much more agreeable CPR to see if they do hold the original docs. Some very useful threads here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?159445-Getting-Them-To-Reveal-Their-Vitals.-Using-CPR-31.14-to-Your-Advantage

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?173201-why-you-shouldnt-use-section-77-78-CCA-1974-if-you-want-the-signed-agreement

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?255329-CPR-part-18-vs-CPR-31.14-Confused-well-read-here

[OfW0lfAndMan]

HSBC is absolutely right. You are requesting a point of information, not proof or evidence. You can simply write and ask if they do in fact hold the original agreement.

If they threaten you with court action then you can use the much more agreeable CPR to see if they do hold the original docs.

 

What is a CPR?

[Dotty50]

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=civil%20procedure%20rules&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDEQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.justice.gov.uk%2Fguidance%2Fcourts-and-tribunals%2Fcourts%2Fprocedure-rules%2Fcivil%2Fmenus%2Frules.htm&ei=s3kgT8KsMYbi8APcuMDCDg&usg=AFQjCNExLnzwtDyAY1YCwzXBJQf-y8yGCg

 

Civil Procedure Rules

[means2anend]

They can send an alleged executed agreement without a signature pursuant to Consumer Credit Agreements Regultaions 1983...but this does not PROVE that an agreement was executed properly and legally in the first place...even more so when the agreement has been varied they are required to send a copy of the original in it's original form as well as an up to date statement of the terms as they currently are...as per HHJ Waksman in Carey v HSBC et al...and the critical words used by HHJ Waksman were 'SHALL INCLUDE[/I]'...to denote a meaning of in addition to ...rather than all the varied terms...undeleted terms... and up to date terms being ALL on one document...in this context I personally think that a request under s82 is much more apt and will cause them much more problems in adhereing to the legal requirements.

 

m2ae

[OfW0lfAndMan]

Thanks to Dotty50, hsbcfiddled and means2anend for the advice and link. Our fightback began today with us sending letters requesting CCA's. With reference to the 12 days +2 rule, is that working days and does the time begin from when the DCA receives the letters?

[scousepie]

Thanks to Dotty50, hsbcfiddled and means2anend for the advice and link. Our fightback began today with us sending letters requesting CCA's. With reference to the 12 days +2 rule, is that working days and does the time begin from when the DCA receives the letters?

 

As far as I am aware it from the date of the letter assuming you posted it in good time, the + 2 is for the post delay I beleive.

[Dotty50]

Thanks to Dotty50, hsbcfiddled and means2anend for the advice and link. Our fightback began today with us sending letters requesting CCA's. With reference to the 12 days +2 rule, is that working days and does the time begin from when the DCA receives the letters?

 

Did you send the letter by recorded delivery? Hopefully you did then after a few days you can go on to the Royal Mail site and track the number for confirmation of delivery.

 

Best now to start your own threads for each creditor and then put a link here if you wish and you will get help from people who have knowledge of who you are dealing with.

[OfW0lfAndMan]

Thanks for the advice. All letters senr recorded and have been received. Will start own threads.

[ilovecats]

Hi

I requested a copy of my credit agreement from Barclaycard as I was being harrassed by a company I had never heard of before for a credit card number I had never owed. it turns out that it was an old egg card I had that was transferred to Barclaycard who in turn gave it their own account number (confusing or what). Anyway, after looking at what they have provided me, I cannot see a signature anywhere, I believe that Egg only did online applications and therefore there would not be. How do you stand with these types of credit agreements? Is it still unforceable? The actual letter states "I enclose a reconstituted copy of your credit agreement, along with a copy of the terms" and states that this complete their obligation under ssections 78 of the Act, is this true? Can I still insist that I am sent a signed copy? Any advice would be greatly recevied. Thank you.

[means2anend]

A mere tick in the siggy box is sufficient...HOWEVER...you can make ir difficult for them to PROVE this under Electronic Communications Act 2000 and I rhink that require an INTENT to tick that box...and that that tick WAS BY YOU...

 

I did this with a DCA on behalf of a friend and they decided to close the account it was to much bother for them.The amendment is in the CCA 1974.... credit agreements concluded online

 

s176A states the form and procedure....but in the Consumer Credit agreements Regulations 1983 there is a requirement for intent....

 

After all when hacking into someones account is so prevalent today ...it may not be disputed that a particular computer from a particular IP address was responsible but can they prove that it was NOT someone else at that address...INTENT from THAT alleged applicant needs to be proved needs....

 

This only relevant if the alleged debtor denies or cannot remember ever having ticked the sig box...

 

The amending instrument is in SI 2004/3236 the relevant section is...

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/3236/article/4/made

 

Notice the point made in subsection 5...although a tick can be sufficient to show that A agreement was concluded in the MANNER required...the word INTEND is also used...the power of that should not be underestimated

Edited February 6, 2012 by means2anend

[ilovecats]

Hi means2anend

 

There doesn't appear to be a ticked signature box or anywhere on what they have supplied me that even states signature or even a date it was supposed to have been signed (electroncially or otherwise), there is a cover letter with just my old address on it, then the acutal agreement has my new address on it, which is not the address at which I may have taken out the credit card. It must have been opened about 8 to 10 years ago.

[means2anend]

Article 4 amends the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 to enable agreements to be concluded electronically and to enable the creditor or owner to include in the signature box information about the process or means of providing, communicating or verifying the signature made by the debtor or hirer.

 

If there is no tick(the alleged debtors) in the box then it cannot comply with s61 a legally 'signed' executed agreement

 

IF there is NO BOX then they have not complied with FORM

[means2anend]

They probably cannot even comply with a s78 request for information as one of the requirements stated by HHJ Waksman in Carey is that amongst other things 'the address at the time which the agreement was legally executed must be correct as of that date'..(roughly speaking)

 

There may also be issues as to time limitations...

[means2anend]

Is cover letter from DCA or OC?

[means2anend]

The fact that a tick is missing...or any thing that the informatuon describes as conveying your signature amounts to the fact that in accordance with Subsection 5 of Article 4 above that iNTENT per se is lacking ...let alone YOUR intent

[car2403]

A mere tick in the siggy box is sufficient...HOWEVER...you can make ir difficult for them to PROVE this under Electronic Communications Act 2000 and I rhink that require an INTENT to tick that box...and that that tick WAS BY YOU...

 

I did this with a DCA on behalf of a friend and they decided to close the account it was to much bother for them.The amendment is in the CCA 1974.... credit agreements concluded online

 

s176A states the form and procedure....but in the Consumer Credit agreements Regulations 1983 there is a requirement for intent....

 

After all when hacking into someones account is so prevalent today ...it may not be disputed that a particular computer from a particular IP address was responsible but can they prove that it was NOT someone else at that address...INTENT from THAT alleged applicant needs to be proved needs....

 

This only relevant if the alleged debtor denies or cannot remember ever having ticked the sig box...

 

The amending instrument is in SI 2004/3236 the relevant section is...

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/3236/article/4/made

 

Notice the point made in subsection 5...although a tick can be sufficient to show that A agreement was concluded in the MANNER required...the word INTEND is also used...the power of that should not be underestimated

 

How can you say you didn't intend to enter a credit agreement when you made repayments under it and in accordance with it?

[means2anend]

Yes...that could be used as 'secondary evidence'....

Also a copy agreement without a tick is analgous to one sent under s78 without a signature as oer CCA 1983...but again it does not PROVE a legally 'signed' agreement...I am exploring all the angles..

[skills999]

Hi All,

 

I have a letter about a credit card debt that says the debt has been sold to a DCA (Arrow Global/Wescot).

 

My question is, Can I still request a copy of the credit card agreement after the debt has been sold?

Would I request a copy of the credit card agreement from the original credit card company or the DCA?

I think I read once (but can’t remember where) that when a debt is sold the recipient does not have to provide a copy of the agreement

because when they bought the debt it was a given that the debt was legally enforceable.

I would be grateful for any information on this.

 

Thanks

[means2anend]

Answer to q.1 is Yes as long is not less than one month the previous request as per s78 CCA 1974

 

Ans to Q.2 is that the onus is upon them to give you a notice of assignment whenever a debt is sold on.however you need to distinguish whether they are still the agent of the Original Creditor or are truly the new purchasers of the debt in which case you would need to request them

 

I think I read once (but can’t remember where) that when a debt is sold the recipient does not have to provide a copy of the agreement

because when they bougt the debt it was a given that the debt was legally enforceable.

There is nothing in the ACT that expressly says this unless someone can correct me...in fact it would be MORE favourable to sell on a useless debt for 'something than to sell on an legally enforceable debt..otherwise they would have pursued it themselves for the full amount

[skills999]

Thanks means2anend, thate good news!

[skills999]

"I think I read once (but can’t remember where) that when a debt is sold the recipient does not have to provide a copy of the agreement

because when they bougt the debt it was a given that the debt was legally enforceable.

There is nothing in the ACT that expressly says this unless someone can correct me...in fact it would be MORE favourable to sell on a useless debt for 'something than to sell on an legally enforceable debt..otherwise they would have pursued it themselves for the full amount"

 

That makes good sence. I suppose if every case was inforcable there would be no need for dca, as the lenders would have in-houes solicitors to take you straight to court.

Infact as there are so many dca's that shows there is no real point in going further than the threats and intimidation stage.