PT2537's CCA request against Littlewoods

[surprise]

As there are several companies under the "Shop Direct Umbrella" I would suspect thats what they are referring to.

[basa48]

Funny thing is, since receipt of that letter my OH inadvertantly placed an order with Littlewoods......and THEY SENT IT !!!!!

 

(We did return it the next day )

[europa16]

Subbing also, as I may need to go down this route in the very near future after the reply I got today from the Information commissioner's office. The letter I received is here (4 pages worth):

 

http://consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/data-protection-default-issues/132655-europa16-littlewoods.html#post2124841

 

Good luck PT

[ouch123]

subbing out of interest

[The GodMother]

Nice to see u back on littlewoods case again PT.

 

Make sure u kick them hard for me and other CAGGERS as they well and truly deserve the kick that they need to recieve.

[pt2537]

ok then, been way toooooo long here

 

so, first thing tuesday, this is in the post

 

Aintree Innovation

Fortune House

Park Lane

Netherton

Bootle

Merseyside

L30 1SL

 

Letter of Claim.

 

Dear Sir or Madam

 

 

I note that from checking my credit file that you have recorded 4 entries on there in relation to previous accounts that were held with your company.

 

I must ask that these entries are removed forthwith, as firstly I have never held 4 accounts with your company and therefore the data is materially incorrect and contrary to the Data Protection Act 1998 as I am sure you will be aware that data must be accurate. You will be aware as to the data you have uploaded onto my file and you will be aware that the data is incorrect as your records will show only 3 accounts were ever held yet 4 are recorded. This is damaging my credit reputation on its own without considering the other matters.

 

Secondly, the records on held on www.annualcreditreport.co.uk it states that a default notice has been served; this is incorrect on all 3 accounts and further more, the records do not state any financial details of the accounts other than defaulted. This is clearly not the case, a default implies that I have breached an obligation to pay you, this is incorrect as there is no obligation to pay where there is an unenforceable credit agreement and I direct you to section 173(3) Consumer Credit Act 1974 which allows for consent to payments to be withdrawn without admission of liability, this is also established in case law, most notably the House of Lords in Wilson and First County Trust 2003 UKHL 40 and furthermore the Lords said that where the lender gives funds out under an unenforceable credit agreement, the debtor cannot be considered to have been unjustly enriched (see Para 46-50 of the judgment of Lord Nichols of Birkenhead)

 

As you will be aware, your organisation breached the Consumer Credit Act 1974 by failing to ensure that a credit agreement which contained all the financial particulars required by the Consumer Credit Agreement Regulations 1983 schedules 1,2 and 6 was provided to me and that such agreement signed and was returned to your organisation before you extended goods on credit terms. This is a direct contravention of your consumer credit licence, which is issued by the Office of Fair Trading.

 

As you will be aware, I did not default on the repayments, in fact far from it, I raised the issue that the failure to provide a credit agreement to me on entry into credit caused severe prejudice as the true cost of borrowing was not clear to me nor were the terms of account on entry into credit, thus breaching s61 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974.accordingly the account was at a dispute as the agreement was clearly improperly executed as defined within s65 (1) CCA 1974 and accordingly unenforceable pursuant to s127(3) CCA 1974. It seems entirely inconsistent with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a lender to take retaliatory action and damage a credit file when the lender has failed to observe the requirements of the 1974 Act. The Act was introduced to protect consumers and to ensure transparency in lending, not to allow lenders to defame a consumers credit files when they have asserted their legal rights to challenge the agreement when the creditor was negligent in ensuring the requirements of the 1974 Act were complied with.

 

The defaults, which you have registered, are in accurate, and unfair as the 3 defaults you have recorded is damaging my career, as I am unable to secure the employment in the legal profession that I wish to seek due to the recorded defaults. I consider the defaults unjustified and on counsel’s advice, it is considered that by recording a default you are conducting a form of enforcement of the agreement. In any event I contend that to damage my credit file in the circumstances where you have failed to follow the legislation that has been in place for long enough for a company such as yours to get it right, is infact an unfair relationship as defined within s140a Consumer Credit Act 1974. In view of the fact that I hold a written admission from your legal department that there never was a signed credit agreement recorded on your systems for my 3 not 4 accounts, I require you to remove these records from my file.

 

If you refuse, then I will be left no option but to seek to instigate proceedings against you, firstly to seek declaratory relief pursuant to s142 (1) CCA 1974. Secondly for an order that you remove the damaging data from my credit file, primarily pursuant to s14 Data Protection Act 1998 and I shall also seek damages to be assessed by the court on the principles established in Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society - [1996] 4 All ER 119 and reaffirmed in Durkin v DSG Retail and HFC Bank for damage to my credit reputation which has clearly been impugned by the malicious and incorrect recording of data on my file.

 

I require the inaccurate data to be removed from my credit file forthwith, I require that you confirm by no later than 4pm on the 8th June 2009 that these records have been removed or that you provide reasons as to why you are refusing to remove the data.

 

If no such response is received, then legal action will commence without further notice after the 8th June 2009, as I have no option as my career is at stake.

 

Please also confirm the correct address for service of court papers in the event that you refuse to remove the data

 

I look forward to your reply,

 

Regards,

 

Time to start the fight

[sequenci]

That looks awesome mate, good luck with it

[Zorro01]

subscribing

[carolmac34]

Subbing to this one, as i too have just started going down this road with Littlewoods myself (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/mail-order-catalogues/198812-littlewoods-debt-where-do.html#post2242215)

 

Best of luck pt2537, your posts fill me with hope

[the_shadow]

any update... 8th of June was the deadline

 

S.

[Dipply75]

Subbing

[bh2362]

Subbing PT,

 

as many others I am battling with these BA***** over exactly the same thing im in the position where, I have recieved blank copies of agreements and have had the final responce letter saying they have no agreement for two account held with them but will continue to process my infomation.

What they said was because there was a clear financial relationship between me and them i.e me recieving goods from them. this gives them the automatic right to log with the CRA's

 

So Im subbing to this and intend to take the same route of action.

 

Keep up the good work.

 

BH

[Alphageek]

From a conversation I had with Sparkie

 

• I asked "Did they not defend saying the fair processing notice is in the catalogue?"
  
• Sparkie replied "Yes they tried that but without the CCA the judge would not entertain it as any transaction that concerns money, banking/financial is classed as "sensitive" "confidential data" and this requires data subjects specific signed consent.........consent cannot be implied........ Information Commissioners Office legal guidance .
   
  It is not just personal data ..................it is confidential personal financial data.
   
  Hope this helps"
  

[bh2362]

thanks Alphageek, i thought as much.

[bh2362]

Hi,

 

just to find out as a General My shop Direct accounts, and other credit cards are running alive with penalty charges.

does anybody know if you have a debt with a default whether you have grounds for removal as part of thst debt was made up from an unlawful charge??

I know Shop Direct are bad for this.

 

Regards

 

BH

[The GodMother]

yes u can try and argue. Do u have a valid cca tho?

[bh2362]

No, No Agreement at all I asked them for it they said they dont have it, and they cant enforce the debt.

[The GodMother]

i can say tho good luck if u try for removal with Shop direct as i dont know anyone that has sucessfully managed that.

[salky1]

hi

 

Have you had any response yet?I've had the letter from Littlewoods stating that they can't locate my agreement and wont be enforcing the balance on 30/06/09.Since then I have received no furthur coresspondence from them.However upon checking my Experian credit report today I noticed that I have 3 late payments which I need to put a stop to before it reaches 8 and I get issued with a default.I'm really worried as i'm renewing my mortgage in December 09 and scared that I might be penalised

[oddball1000]

AWESOME

PT2537

 

MORE ACTION THAN AVATAR, IT'S LIKE LOST , JUST KEEPS YOU GLUED:D

[coolchris]

Hi everyone,

 

im new here so let me just explain my situation...

 

I have 2 default notices on my credit record. one from new look/ikano finance (paid in full 1 year ago), and one from littlewoods where the debt was then sold onto Cabot (this one i am still paying at a low ammount each month)

 

I'd like to know if anyone knows whether i can have either of these default notices removed from my credit record, as its making life very difficult to the point where i cant apply for a job in a bank because of my credit score!!!

 

the new look DN i do remember receiving almost exactly a year ago today and it was then immediately paid off in full, CAN I STILL GET THIS REMOVED BEFORE THE 6 YEAR PERIOD?

 

the littlewoods/cabot DN is a whole different kettle of fish! I NEVER recieved a default notice, but other than that I NEVER SIGNED A CREDIT AGREEMENT WITH THEM and yet they still kept my account open and continued to allow me to buy from them, I found the credit agreement unsigned that i was supposed to sign and send back a few months ago and put it in the bin as i didnt think it was relevant.

 

can anyone help me?? as i'd really like to clear up my credit score so i can not only find a job but also look into buying my first house!!!

 

thanks

 

If you did not sign a credit agreement then the debt is unenforceable, and after a fight, littlewoods will stop pursuing, however they will keep the record on file internally and will put this on your credit report.

To be honest I dont think you have a cat in hells chance of clearing your credit score, unless you can convince the credit ombudsman (or whatever they are called) that you were duped into getting credit fraudulently...an effort that in my opinion you really have no chance in achieving.

[waders]

Hi All,

 

Basically Im Not Holding An Account With Littlewoods But i Am With Kays And I Beleive There Linked Somewhere Along The Line.....

 

My Situation Is My Account Is In Arrears On Approx £4200, They Decided To Add Account Cover Plus To Various Purchases And When I Noticed These Being Added To My Minimum Payments I Refused To Continue Paying. I Called Kays They Said They Will Take The Account Cover Plus Off Of The Bill And Im Supposed To Pay £*.** I Agreed To This.

 

Then I Paid The Minimum To Which I Later Find Out They Have Added A Late Payment And A Arrears Fee Of £12 Each Time.

 

I Today Recieved A Letter From NDR But Im Currently About To Send A Request For A CCA. Should I Send It Still?

 

Sorry For It Being So Long Winded

 

Thanks

 

Waders!

[alfwithhair]

Hi All,

 

Basically Im Not Holding An Account With Littlewoods But i Am With Kays And I Beleive There Linked Somewhere Along The Line.....

 

My Situation Is My Account Is In Arrears On Approx £4200, They Decided To Add Account Cover Plus To Various Purchases And When I Noticed These Being Added To My Minimum Payments I Refused To Continue Paying. I Called Kays They Said They Will Take The Account Cover Plus Off Of The Bill And Im Supposed To Pay £*.** I Agreed To This.

 

Then I Paid The Minimum To Which I Later Find Out They Have Added A Late Payment And A Arrears Fee Of £12 Each Time.

 

I Today Recieved A Letter From NDR But Im Currently About To Send A Request For A CCA. Should I Send It Still?

 

Sorry For It Being So Long Winded

 

Thanks

 

Waders!

 

You need to start a new thread in the general debt section, you will then have a proper trail to any answers you receive

[animallover24]

Hi...I sent a CCa request to NDR/very/marshall ward/kays/most catalogues - got reply saying they were unable to locate an executed agreement for my accounts but enclosed copy of the current agreement which applied to this type of account. they say the date when the account was opened and that i agreed to make payments every 28 days.

 

they then say my balance and what i have paid in last 12 months. they say i am now in default and has been registered.

 

I also got a letter back from STUDIO saying ' the office of fair trading and local trading standards acknowledge that for the Home shopping industry the supply of an exact copy of the credit agreement together with all relevant financial information is acceptable to meet my request.

 

then they say, you can be assured that legal advice is sought in such matters where liability is in dispute. It is clear the debt exist but, of course, we are also aware that the Courts would not, at present, be able to grant an enforcement order should a default summons be issued by us because of non payment and it was defended on a challenge to produce a copy of the original signed agreement, as defined by section 61 of the CCA 1974, unless we were able to produce a signed copy of the original agreement in support of the claim. It is only in this instance that it would be cost justified to recover originals from our archives.

 

they also say that I would have signed 2 copies - one for them and one for me to keep in a safe place! they say the company will not write off any debt just because there may be the possibility of a legal defence if we were to take legal action as a method to recover the debt owing to us'.

 

also ' if it subsequently transpires that you did not sign a CCA we realise it will be unenforcable but it is not void or unlawful debt. we are satisfied upon discussion with the Information Commissioners Office and on legal advice that it can still be registered as a default with credit reference agencies.

 

I am now stuck with them all as to what I can do next - each one has sent me a balnk unsigned agreement and I have written back requesting a true copy and received this letter off studio but nothing from the rest.

 

is there anything else I can do???

 

Sorry this post is long but its 3.38am and I cannot sleep with the stress of it all!! Be very grateful for any help...thank you

[coolchris]

That is NOT acceptable by law and they know it. If they cannot find a TRUE SIGNED COPY of your credit agreement, then that agreement is unenforceable by LAW and they should NOT pursue you for the debt. Its THEIR fault for not doing their job, not yours. They pay the consequences. Its bull**** about the OFT saying that any old copy is OK. Its NOT and they know it. They are lying..a tactic all too familiar with myself. I took on Littlewoods exactly the same thing and eventually, after a year of wrangling and bull**** harrasment, they relented with what they call a CCA5 letter. They will go through stages until they know they cannot get anything from you. Be persistent and above all DO NOT GIVE IN to their bullyboy tactics. YOU are in the right on this matter, NOT THEM.

As far as this being on your credit record, then yes unfortunately it will be and will take some damn good proof to get it lifted by the ombudsman/adjudicator or whatever they call themselves.

Good Luck and remember you are in control, not them.