SLC Cannot Supply The Original Agreement

[tamadus]

Yes you did, but my pride is still hurt. Anyway we had better not talk anymore other wise pete will feel left out. Night xx

 

Pete always feels left out lol it's Bruce we have to worry about

[sam19677]

Morning all. Need advice please, I sent of a CCA request to Halifax Credit Card( in Fife) and a seperate request to Halifax( chester) for a loan I had a few years ago. Well this morning received a CC statement and they've creditered the 2 seperate £1 PO to the credit card. Do I neeed to write to them again. The 12 days were up on 26th Oct. Thanks Sam x

[tamadus]

Good Morning Sam,

 

They are now in a default situation, and in theory cannot charge interest or any other charges. They have a further calender month to provide the information you asked for and then they are commiting an offence. I personally wouldnt contact them, although a subtle reminder as the end of the month gets closer might shake them up a little bit.

[sam19677]

Morning Dave. Thanks for info. I'll do as you suggest. I don't know what there doing crediting the £1 that I sent for the loan CCA on the credit card.Thanks again.

 

Ps Morning Pete x

[paulwlton]

I think people on this thread are starting to get confused, the facts are, a fully executed agreement must be signed by both parties, if this is not the case then the agreement is unenforcable in a court of law.

This is my view and the view if the OFT, however only a judge can decide the outcome if either side contests this.

What i'm saying is, if the finance company fobs the creditor off then let a judge decide.

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/BA02B3B2-F6D4-4EE0-BDB8-825BB582F1C7/0/oft801.pdf

[tamadus]

Morning Dave. Thanks for info. I'll do as you suggest. I don't know what there doing crediting the £1 that I sent for the loan CCA on the credit card.Thanks again.

 

Ps Morning Pete x

 

Either they have slipped up and not realised what your request was so put the money into your account as they have nowhere else to put it, or they are planning not to charge you for your agreement

[tamadus]

I think people on this thread are starting to get confused, the facts are, a fully executed agreement must be signed by both parties, if this is not the case then the agreement is unenforcable in a court of law.

This is my view and the view if the OFT, however only a judge can decide the outcome if either side contests this.

What i'm saying is, if the finance company fobs the creditor off then let a judge decide.

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/BA02B3B2-F6D4-4EE0-BDB8-825BB582F1C7/0/oft801.pdf

 

Paul the problem arises out of the CCA in that it and various subsequent Statutory Instuments dictate what information is needed to satisfy a request for the executed credit agreement under sections 77, 78 and 85. Yes I agree that ultimately a judge can decide, but his decision will also be affected by the wording of the CCA and the SI's.

[Peterbard]

What i'm saying is, if the finance company fobs the creditor off then let a judge decide.

 

But also isn't it true that the onus of proof of the existance of such an executed agreement lies with the creditor ,It is not up to the debtor ro proove the non existanse of the agreement.Hence section 77 of the act.

 

Peter

[tamadus]

What i'm saying is, if the finance company fobs the creditor off then let a judge decide.

 

But also isn't it true that the onus of proof of the existance of such an executed agreement lies with the creditor ,It is not up to the debtor ro proove the non existanse of the agreement.Hence section 77 of the act.

 

Peter

 

Yes Peter the onus is on the creditor to prove the existance of the agreement, but do we all want to go to court so a judge can decree what is and isnt an acceptable agreement?

[Peterbard]

The creditor would have to initiate court proceediongs. I do not think that the judge would be very impressed with them wasting court time when all they had to do was produce a copy of the signed document,any way why would they go to the expence if they had the agrement anyway and if they did'nt they would loose.

 

Peter

[Peterbard]

Sorry had to edit my earlier post it's very early for me brains not working properly yet.

[Number6]

 

Ps Morning Pete x

 

lol!

 

Afternoon Sam.

 

Pete

[Peterbard]

Dave imagine the scenario (this is apart from the fact that in my opinion the creditor is not conforming to section 77 by returning a signed executed agreement)

You apply for your copy of the contract sighting sec77

They send you a copy of an agreement without a signature.

You reject this as not being able to verify it’s authenticity (would you remember every word on an agreement that could have been made up to six years earlier)

Perhaps you send the letter below to the creditor.

Dear Sir

Thank you for the documents you sent as a response to my request under the CCA 1974 section 77. I am afraid however that I cannot accept that these are true copies of any agreements alleged to have been executed between ourselves, I am sure you are aware the burden on proof for the existence of any such agreements lies with you.

Perhaps I might suggest that production a true copy of the alleged executed contract including a signature might serve to settle the matter.

Your only other action would be for you to take action in court to prove that such a document ever existed, I am sure that the Judge would take a dim view of any action taken that could be so readily remedied by the production of the signed contract.

I would remind you that the time limit for the production of any such agreement continues and if no true copy is produced within the prescribed period then you will be in default and any alleged contract will be unenforceable in law.

The creditor loses their senses and decides to take you to court in order to enforce the agreement.

As defendant you are entitled to disclosure of all documents relevant to the case.

The claimant can’t disclose what he hasn’t got.

You apply to the court to have the case thrown out on the grounds that the claimant has no evidence.

Or

The claimant produces the document and therefore there is no need for the case to continue as you have what you requested in the first place.

Complete farce and makes no sense whatsoever

[Number6]

I think people on this thread are starting to get confused, the facts are, a fully executed agreement must be signed by both parties, if this is not the case then the agreement is unenforcable in a court of law.

This is my view and the view if the OFT, however only a judge can decide the outcome if either side contests this.

What i'm saying is, if the finance company fobs the creditor off then let a judge decide.

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/BA02B3B2-F6D4-4EE0-BDB8-825BB582F1C7/0/oft801.pdf

 

The courts have quite wide powers to enforce an agreement. The "agreement" does not necessarily have to have been properly executed to be enforceable if you have signed something that contains the T&C's.

 

The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)

(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the

prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the

prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the

prescribed manner).

 

Pete

[Number6]

I would remind you that the time limit for the production of any such agreement continues and if no true copy is produced within the prescribed period then you will be in default and any alleged contract will be unenforceable in law.

 

That wouldn't apply though would it? They have fulfilled S78 by producing the "generic" copy as allowed under the 1983 regulations and there is no timescale for production of anything else.

 

Pete

[noomill060]

I thought we had confirmed that the 1983 regs had no bearing on s.78?

[noomill060]

"I do not agree with your interpretation of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983. I believe that these regulations apply to pre-contractual documents or document copies issued by the creditor in the immediate aftermath of a credit agreement under the control of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the Act) Sections 58,62, 63 and 64.

 

Sections 77 and 78 of the Act are not bound by the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983; any request under Sections 77 and 78 of the Act can only be fulfilled with a copy of the fully and properly executed agreement conforming to Section 61 of the Act."

[Number6]

Morning all. Need advice please, I sent of a CCA request to Halifax Credit Card( in Fife) and a seperate request to Halifax( chester) for a loan I had a few years ago. Well this morning received a CC statement and they've creditered the 2 seperate £1 PO to the credit card. Do I neeed to write to them again. The 12 days were up on 26th Oct. Thanks Sam x

 

I would totally ignore them until their full time is up.

 

You need to allow them 12 working days (excluding bank hols and weekends) + 2 days for the letter to have reached them then a further full calendar month (not 30 days). It effectively works out at three weeks + one month give or take.

 

At the end of that period I would then write and tell them they have exceeded the time limit for replying, that you believe they have now committed an offence and that the agreement in no longer enforceable.

 

Pete

[Peterbard]

Who says it's a true copy.If you don't accept it as such then it is up to them to prove it is.

Simple enough to do provide a copy of the signed orriginal as requested.

Otherwise the could send you a bill for the canary wharf development and be able to enforce that.

 

Any way i am still of the opinion that the 1983 regs don't apply

 

Peter

[Number6]

I thought we had confirmed that the 1983 regs had no bearing on s.78?

 

Oops... I forgot.

 

There may be an issue with that opinion. We are awaiting further information ( we being me, tamadus and peterbard) before we can give an unequivocal confirmation.

 

Please ignore it for the time being.

 

Pete

[Peterbard]

By the way good afternoon everybody

 

(I was feeling a bit left out)

[Number6]

Who says it's a true copy.If you don't accept it as such then it is up to them to prove it is.

Simple enough to do provide a copy of the signed orriginal as requested.

Otherwise the could send you a bill for the canary wharf development and be able to enforce that.

 

Any way i am still of the opinion that the 1983 regs don't apply

 

Peter

 

If we were to assume, for the sake of argument, that the 1983 regs do apply then the creditor has to do nothing else. You can stop paying them and force them into taking court action but you cannot force them to produce any other documentation prior to court.

 

Pete

[noomill060]

Hello Peter!

[Number6]

In any event S127(3) of the CCA is pretty wide ranging as a possible escape clause for the lender.

 

Pete

[Number6]

Hello Peter!

 

Hi noo!

 

Pete