Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
    • Hi, we are looking to get some opinions on weather or not to bother fighting this PCN. This comes from a very big retail park parking where there are restaurants, hotel, amongst other businesses. The parking is free but I suppose there must be a time limit on it that I am not aware of. We were in the area for around 4 hours. Makes us wonder how they deal with people staying in the hotel as the ANPR is on what appears to be a publicly maintained street (where london buses run) which leads to the different parking areas including the hotel.  1 Date of the infringement 26/05/2024 2 Date on the NTK  31/05/2024 3 Date received 07/06/2024 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]  YES 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Entry and exit photos however, based on the photographs we are almost sure the photos are taken on public street. This is the location I believe photos are taken from.  https://maps.app.goo.gl/eii8zSmFFhVZDRpbA 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A 7 Who is the parking company? UKPA. UK Parking Administration LTD 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] The Colonnades, Croydon, CR0 4RQ For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. British Parking Association (BPA) Thanks in advance for any assistance.  UKPA PCN The Collonades-redacted.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
        • Like
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

SLC Cannot Supply The Original Agreement


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5488 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I agree.

 

 

 

No, sorry, you are plain wrong here!

 

If the lender sent a document, even if it's unsigned and doesn't have a signature box then they HAVE complied. The CCA 1974 was amended by the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1984 (the CNCD), Section 3(1) and (2) [expurgated] of which states:

 

"(1)...... every copy of an executed agreement........ or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor...... under any provision of the Act shall be a true copy thereof.

 

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy-

 

(a) any information included in an executed agreement ..... relating to the debtor......

 

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature .....

 

So a "copy" of the agreement, so long as it contains all of the statutory terms and conditions does not need to be signed nor does it need to have any of the debtors details.

 

 

 

Very likely true but it doesn't change the fact that the lender has complied with S77/78.

 

Pete

 

I understand what you are saying Re:

(2) (a) (b)

However (1) states -

"(1)...... every copy of an executed agreement........ or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor...... under any provision of the Act shall be a true copy thereof.

 

"A TRUE COPY"

 

How could a template of Credit Agreement be considered to be "A true copy of the executed Agreement".

 

You are probably right but it doesn't make sense to me. I think that we all need to obtain a legal opinion on the exact interpretation/view.

 

As you guys know, I have informed TS that MS are in breach of The Act. No doubt TS will contact me after christmas with their opinion which may help us all.

 

Love AC

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulwlton viewpost.gif

Just received a threatening phone call from Barclaycard.

I made a CCA request in early October so i beleive they are in default and have commited an offence, i explained why i've stopped payments.

 

They have defaulted my account today.

 

That sounds remarkably like enforcement action Paul, Time for you to have words with Trading standards I think.

 

I made the nasty little lady aware that i shall be contacting the relevant authorities.

 

Barclaycard seem to think that a court will enforce an agreement which has not been signed,

 

If they default me today, get ready for a fight nasty little lady.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

"A TRUE COPY"

 

How could a template of Credit Agreement be considered to be "A true copy of the executed Agreement".

 

You are probably right but it doesn't make sense to me. I think that we all need to obtain a legal opinion on the exact interpretation/view.

 

I'm no legal-eagle and i have to confess that all this quoting of various laws makes my head spin, but i fail to see how a template of an agreement can have any legal standing. They've simply taken a blank form, stuck my name on it, filled in some numbers and PRESTO 'we have sent a true copy'. I could start a nice little business like that: pick a name out of the phone book, send them a demand for money, present a 'true copy' of an agreement, just as my creditor has, & say they must pay. It mystifies me. If this goes to court, will the courts enforce an agreement where no signed copy exists? How can they? Can i refuse to pay until they find what i want or the courts decide otherwise? CONFUSED!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just contacted trading standards, apparently they are still in their rights to register a default but cannot enforce the debt whithout a copy of the agreement.

 

Barclaycard have commited an offence and i want to prosecute them, i think someone needs to take these bully boys to court and i think it just might be me.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just contacted trading standards, apparently they are still in their rights to register a default but cannot enforce the debt whithout a copy of the agreement.

 

More confusion. As I understand things, the debt can remain 'live' yet is unenforceable as without a signed contract, there is no contract. BUT - right at the beginning of this thread there was a poster (baconbuttyman i think) who found himself in just that situation yet had the debt reduced to zero, all defaults & negative references to the debt removed from CRA files, and had his payments returned. Everyone seemed to agree at that time that this was just as it should be - no agreement=no contract=never any debt in the first place=any payments taken to be returned/defaults etc removed. Now it seems that the general consensus is that although not being able to produce a signed agreement renders the debt unenforceable (and presumably uncollectable), its stays 'live' & can remain on your credit file. Which is it? They can't both be correct. EVEN MORE CONFUSED!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul- Have a read through the whole of this thread. I found this letter but I'm sure there are better ones.

 

 

 

your bank plc

rip off st

tosserland

uk

 

16/06/2006

 

Letter Before Action

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I do not acknowledge ANY debt to your company. I require you to supply the following documentation before I will correspond further on this matter.

 

1. You must supply me with a true copy of the alleged agreement you refer to. This is my right under your obligation to supply a copy of the agreement under the legislation contained within s.78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 (s.77 (1) for fixed sum credit) - your obligation also extends to providing a statement of account. I enclose a £1 postal order in payment of the statutory fee, PO Serial Number xxxxx.

 

2. A signed true copy of the deed of assignment of the above referenced agreement that you allege exists.

 

3. You are notified that you were obliged to supply these documents, whether you are the original creditor or not under S189 of the CCA 1974.

 

You had 12 days to comply. After 30 days of non-compliance you were in criminal beach of the CCA 1974.

 

Non-compliance with my request is a criminal offence under the above Act and will result in a report being submitted to the relevant statutory authorities.

 

Failure to provide the requested information is a criminal offence punishable by upto a £2500 fine and/or six months imprisonment

 

As you are aware, a credit agreement that is not properly documented and signed by the customer is totally unenforceable under the CCA and therefore is a complete defence to any court claim that is issued.

 

Take note at this stage, that any legal action you may contemplate will be both vigorously defended and contested.

 

 

Yours faithfully.

 

 

 

 

Paul

 

 

change it to your needs (but not too much)

Link to post
Share on other sites

You and me too, Paul.

 

I recently sent a letter to a DCA that that ignored my CCA request and on reminding them that they had commited an offence were conveniantly completely unable to trace any record of me what-so-ever. Where do they get the gall???

 

Incidently, I spoke to a consumer law solicitor last week who was of the opinion that once the offence was committed under the Act court enforcement of the agreement was very unlikely and it was a case of my either considering the matter settled or going for repayment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the debt remains- but the agreement CANNOT be enforced.

 

(And the creditor has committed a criminal offence and could be sent to jail if he cant give a judge a damn good explanation.)

 

Hence creditors tend to fight shy of any further action, apart from defaulting you.

 

You could also report them to the OFT for their criminal default and take them to court to have EVERY PENNY returned which you paid them under the agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

rosierose-

 

it matters not whether the company can find any trace of you request.

 

If you can prove the letter was delivered and signed for by them, (such as by Recorded Delivery) and can prove that you paid them the £1, (keep a record of the serial number of the Postal Order you send)

 

If you can produce this as evidence that you requested a CCA s.77 request, the creditor may as well admit they are lying to the court, admit they have no explaination as to why they cant produce the true copy and then take themselves off to jail for six months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the debt remains- but the agreement CANNOT be enforced.

 

(And the creditor has committed a criminal offence and could be sent to jail if he cant give a judge a damn good explanation.)

 

Hence creditors tend to fight shy of any further action, apart from defaulting you.

 

You could also report them to the OFT for their criminal default and take them to court to have EVERY PENNY returned which you paid them under the agreement.

 

Well, i have written again asking for a 'true SIGNED copy' but from whats been written here, they can now take as long as they like to comply with this request as they supplied a 'true copy' (ie. a 'copy of what the agreement would have looked like') in response to my original CCA. What i'm hoping is that they admit that they don't actually have a 'signed copy'. Commonsense would suggest that if the had such a copy, they would have sent it and avoided any dispute. We'll see. However, to get them back on a legal timscale that they seem to be avoiding by sending me what is effectively a template, can i simply issue a new CCA, together with a new £1 fee, requesting a "true SIGNED copy"? That would put them back onto the 12 day + one month time frame.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, i have written again asking for a 'true SIGNED copy' but from whats been written here, they can now take as long as they like to comply with this request as they supplied a 'true copy' (ie. a 'copy of what the agreement would have looked like') in response to my original CCA. What i'm hoping is that they admit that they don't actually have a 'signed copy'. Commonsense would suggest that if the had such a copy, they would have sent it and avoided any dispute. We'll see. However, to get them back on a legal timscale that they seem to be avoiding by sending me what is effectively a template, can i simply issue a new CCA, together with a new £1 fee, requesting a "true SIGNED copy"? That would put them back onto the 12 day + one month time frame.

 

I wouldnt bother sending another letter soli.

 

Just make an official repoirt to Trading Standards / OFT as suggested by noomill.

 

They have hed their chance to supply the documentation and it's obvious they are not interested in the repurcussions that are now arising.

 

I will be making a claim in the new year for repayment of interest and charges at least one credit card where they have failed to supply the requested documents.

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

one of my creditors sent me something saying this is what it would look like, and was signed by no one at all. in the same letter they said all they would do if i paid nothing more was register a default which id be stuck with for 6 years as they were aware that the debt was unenforceable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

one of my creditors sent me something saying this is what it would look like, and was signed by no one at all. in the same letter they said all they would do if i paid nothing more was register a default which id be stuck with for 6 years as they were aware that the debt was unenforceable.

 

That 6 years they quote is only an industry standard and has no basis in law. Only items in the public domain and ordered by a court, like a CCJ can legally remain of your credit file for that long.

 

Any other item is only allowed to remain there for a 'reasonable' amount of time.

 

I suggest writing to them and demanding the default be removed. (something else I plan doing in the new year)

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldnt bother sending another letter soli.

 

Just make an official repoirt to Trading Standards / OFT as suggested by noomill.

 

They have hed their chance to supply the documentation and it's obvious they are not interested in the repurcussions that are now arising.

 

I will be making a claim in the new year for repayment of interest and charges at least one credit card where they have failed to supply the requested documents.

 

Noomill says that they are in default - but they aren't. They've supplied a 'true copy' that conforms with CCA, albeit not a signed copy. OK, they can't enforce the debt, and the debt remains, but they aren't in criminal default in the true sense of the word. And they now have no legal obligation to reply to my update letter asking for a signed agreement as its not a formal CCA request, merely a follow-up saying I'm not happy with what they've supplied.. Thats why i figured, for the price of a £1 postal order & recorded delivery letter, it would be worth a new CCA asking for a TRUE SIGNED COPY thereby meaning i COULD take legal action when they failed to comply. At the moment, I'm in limbo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect I think we must agree to differ about this number 6.

The creditor has to send a true copy of "the executed agreemant" as per section 77 not a generic or current one but a copy of the one you signed"executed".

Now i contend that it is up to them to show that this is a true copy of the one you signed . It is not your responsibility to prove it isn't valid . The burden of proof is on them.

 

Therefore In my opinion the document is not a true copy unless you verify it as being so, and how is that possiible the agrement may be 5 pages long and are you supposed to remember and confirm all the criteria are the same as the one you signed years ago.

 

Let us not forget that credit companies are updating agreemnts all the time, to comply with new regulations and adjust interest rates if coppy they send you is their current one it is very unlikely to have the same terms and conditions as the one you signed.

 

To repeat The 1983 SI alows them to leave out certain information but it stil must contain a duplated copy of the terms and conditions of the contract you agreed to. If you say it dosen't then it is up to them to prove otherwise and again if they had the orriginal why would they not just send a copy of that.

 

No in my opinion if the copy does not bear your signature then you can not possibly verify it as a true copy of the executed agreements with all the orriginal terms and cnditions and therefore they have not compied with the act.

 

Peter

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect I think we must agree to differ about this number 6.

The creditor has to send a true copy of "the executed agreemant" as per section 77 not a generic or current one but a copy of the one you signed"executed".

Now i contend that it is up to them to show that this is a true copy of the one you signed . It is not your responsibility to prove it isn't valid . The burden of proof is on them.

 

Therefore In my opinion the document is not a true copy unless you verify it as being so, and how is that possiible the agrement may be 5 pages long and are you supposed to remember and confirm all the criteria are the same as the one you signed years ago.

 

Let us not forget that credit companies are updating agreemnts all the time, to comply with new regulations and adjust interest rates if coppy they send you is their current one it is very unlikely to have the same terms and conditions as the one you signed.

 

To repeat The 1983 SI alows them to leave out certain information but it stil must contain a duplated copy of the terms and conditions of the contract you agreed to. If you say it dosen't then it is up to them to prove otherwise and again if they had the orriginal why would they not just send a copy of that.

 

No in my opinion if the copy does not bear your signature then you can not possibly verify it as a true copy of the executed agreements with all the orriginal terms and cnditions and therefore they have not compied with the act.

 

Peter

 

Thanks Peter. That was my opinion when I originally joined this thread - namely that a 'true copy' needed to be a fully executed (therefore signed) copy - otherwise what is the point in a creditor supplying one? Its generally agreed that an agreement becomes unenforceable without a signed copy, so a generic copy is worthless. Its my belief that companies send these out in the absence of the correct documentaion hoping that Mr Average will believe they have complied & dutifully fall into line. As far as I'm concered, theyhaven't complied with my CCA, are now over the initial 12-day period (therefore in default) & into the one month period before they commit a criminal offence. As I say, i was considering sending a new CCA specifically requesting they supply a 'true SIGNED copy' thereby removing any ambiguity or loopholes for them to seize upon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noomill says that they are in default - but they aren't. They've supplied a 'true copy' that conforms with CCA, albeit not a signed copy. OK, they can't enforce the debt, and the debt remains, but they aren't in criminal default in the true sense of the word. And they now have no legal obligation to reply to my update letter asking for a signed agreement as its not a formal CCA request, merely a follow-up saying I'm not happy with what they've supplied.. Thats why i figured, for the price of a £1 postal order & recorded delivery letter, it would be worth a new CCA asking for a TRUE SIGNED COPY thereby meaning i COULD take legal action when they failed to comply. At the moment, I'm in limbo.

 

I think you will only get a repeat of what they have already sent. If they could supply a 'true signed copy' they would already have done so. Another CCA request will get the same result as they dont have to supply a signed copy under section 77/78.

 

We have to remember that sections 77/78 only stipulate a TRUE COPY and signatures can be omited. Therefore your application for a TRUE SIGNED copy will only result in a TRUE COPY ( ie no signature) being sent. IMHO it's probably better to allow them to go into the criminal default situation and report them.

Alliance & leicester:Settled 8/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/alliance-leicester-successes/19700-tamadus-l.html?highlight=tamadus

Capital One:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/capital-one/16644-tamadus-capital-one.html?highlight=tamadus

MBNA 2 accounts:Settled 22/9/06 http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions-successes/13831-tamadus-mbna-i.html?highlight=tamadus

Smile:Settled 15/11/06

Egg Card:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent 2/10/06

GE Money:S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) sent3/8/06 LBA sent 26/9/06

Abbey:ERC prelim sent 14/9/06. LBA sent 2/10/06. Now it's getting interesting so keep watching

Barclaycard:In criminal default watch this space

Lloyds TSB:In criminal default watch this space

 

If my comments have been useful please click the scales and let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: the phone call this morning with Barclays, the word fraud was brought up by the nasty lady, she stated if your saying the debt has never existed then this is a fraudulent claim (i didn't say this) i said it's unenforcable in court without a signed agreement.

 

Scare tactics.

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received a threatening phone call from Barclaycard.

I made a CCA request in early October so i beleive they are in default and have commited an offence, i explained why i've stopped payments.

 

They have defaulted my account today.

 

I agree with others the fact that they have defaulted you (and Barclaycard/Mercers are renowned for it) is contrary to section 2 (I think) of the OFTs guidleines on debt collection. If they are sharing your data with the CRAs and they have not provided a copy of the original contart they are in breech of principles of the DPA. The fact that they have defaulted you whilst the debt is in dispute is also a breech of your rights under the act.

 

Right a letter of complaint to the data controller of Barclays (address on the Information Commissioner) website, telling them that they are sharing your information with third parties without (you contend) your written agreement. If no reply within 12 working days reprt to the Information Commissioner.

 

The OFT and TS should also be informed of your complaint to the IC.

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: the phone call this morning with Barclays, the word fraud was brought up by the nasty lady, she stated if your saying the debt has never existed then this is a fraudulent claim (i didn't say this) i said it's unenforcable in court without a signed agreement.

 

Scare tactics.

 

These 'phone calls are recorded make a complaint to the Company Secretary (address on companies house website) and ask for the person who rang to make an apology. Make alot of noise. I have and it keeps them on their back foot, whilst your saving up the money to take them to court!

 

LOL

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: the phone call this morning with Barclays, the word fraud was brought up by the nasty lady, she stated if your saying the debt has never existed then this is a fraudulent claim (i didn't say this) i said it's unenforcable in court without a signed agreement.

 

Scare tactics.

 

 

What fraud? They are pishhing in the wind, flailing against reality and clutching at straws. Their arrogance knows no bounds and they delight in trying to intimidate

 

You are merely exercising your right under the CCA.

 

If Barclays fail to comply with the law it is they who will ultimately suffer.

 

DO NOT ring them again.

 

 

As Corporal Jones used to say:

 

"They dont like it up them, Captain Mainwaring"

 

 

Keep all comunication by letter from now on and make complaint to OFT against Barclays for their criminal default.

 

 

 

Did you get the name of the nasty lady?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...