SLC Cannot Supply The Original Agreement

[funbint]

I certainly couldn't deny I had the money - it was paid into my bank account, so its there for all to see. Nor can I deny that i made repayments, for much the same reason. What I CAN argue is the terms I agreed to. And if they can't produce a piece of paper, signed by me, clearly saying that 'i agree to pay back the sum of xxxx over a period of xxxxx years at xxxxx percent interest', then I don't see how they can get back any more than the principal sum, at best. Otherwise, taking this arguement to the 'nth degree', they could simply state that i agreed to pay it back at 1000% apr, or anything else that enters their heads. Also, they are unable to prove i agreed - or was even aware of - their T&C's. Thats my best line of defence i reckon.

 

I would doubt anyone could deny that the money was put in there account and rightly so. But you could deny you ever asked for it in the first place especailly if they have no supprting evidence. The repayments are taken automaticaly in most cases and are unstopable so they are in effect taking money from you by force that you haven't agreed and without concent to which in my mind constitutes theft and another reason to petition to have their licence revoked.

 

Taking it a stage further if thats the case the banks could start putting money into every ones accounts and start making interest at will.

 

Agreed the whole point of having the contract in first place is so that both parties agreed to the terms.

 

RGDS

FB

[Peterbard]

But they also said, in writing, that they have now supplied all documentation they hold on thos account.

 

If they admit that they have sent copys of all paperwork regarding your account and none of them are a copy of the executed copy of the agrement containing all the prescribed terms,then they have shot themselves in the foot because you have documentarry proof that that the do not posses any enforceable contract .

[Peterbard]

Paula I would go further. Write to them as Peter says but also add that you want a copy of your agreement that conforms to Section 61 of the CCA 1974.

 

Pete

 

You can ask unfortunately the 1983 reg also applies to the precontractual copies and if you did get a copy they would be within their rights to with hold the signiturebox.

 

I still believe that this rediculous restriction on the 77 request is incorrect and illogical and given time i will prove it.

How is it possible to verify every aspect of an agreement you may have signed 5 years ago as being a true copy?

No a signature is an essential tool for ensuring the authentisity and it has always been so.

 

That is why i wil not acknowledge any document that porports to be endorsed by me without seeing my signature on it.

 

Cheers Peter

[funbint]

But they also said, in writing, that they have now supplied all documentation they hold on thos account.

 

If they admit that they have sent copys of all paperwork regarding your account and none of them are a copy of the executed copy of the agrement containing all the prescribed terms,then they have shot themselves in the foot because you have documentarry proof that that the do not posses any enforceable contract .

 

The only question about that is weather they have to or is it restricted by any other part of the DPA?

 

If not then all of us that have made SAR's should have received them with there statement copies I certainly did'nt and in the letter I sent it does say any other data, which would look pretty poor if they do produce it in court and then are questioned as to why they had not provided a copy at that time.

 

RGDS

FB

[soli2006]

The only question about that is weather they have to or is it restricted by any other part of the Data Protection Act?

 

If not then all of us that have made S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'s should have received them with there statement copies I certainly did'nt and in the letter I sent it does say any other data, which would look pretty poor if they do produce it in court and then are questioned as to why they had not provided a copy at that time.

 

RGDS

FB

 

 

The statement they made that they have now supplied ALL documents they hold in relation to my account was made in response to a CCA request. I've repoduced the text of thier letter in an earlier post. What now then? They have seemingly shot themselves in the foot, I agree.

[Number6]

The statement they made that they have now supplied ALL documents they hold in relation to my account was made in response to a CCA request. I've repoduced the text of thier letter in an earlier post. What now then? They have seemingly shot themselves in the foot, I agree.

 

Sorry to repeat, but my letter covers that:

 

 

I now consider the matter closed.

 

Ball is then in their court

 

Pete

[Peterbard]

A question

I noticed that on the 2006 update of the CCA the new section77A that complels creditors to provide monthly statements on credit accounts states that no interest or default charges are payable whilst the creditor is in default of this instruction.

Does the same apply to the current section 77 requirements ?

 

Peter

[rosierose]

Hi Funbint.

 

Form what I have read the courts will not enforce a claim for payment under an improperly executed agreement.

 

Have you managed to have a look at Wilson vs North County Trust (and its subsequent appeals) yet? Its about an improperly execute agreement and was an education to me!

 

Kind Regards

 

Rosie

[funbint]

Hi Funbint.

 

Form what I have read the courts will not enforce a claim for payment under an improperly executed agreement.

 

Have you managed to have a look at Wilson vs North County Trust (and its subsequent appeals) yet? Its about an improperly execute agreement and was an education to me!

 

Kind Regards

 

Rosie

 

Hi Rosie

 

yeah had quick look at that one you mentioned, but i think the problem will be that i read elsewhere on here that no presidents can be set in the small claims procedure so every case will judged individually. So could go either way on each case.

 

But could help your case if mentioned........

 

Someone please put me straight if i've got the wrong end of the stick so to speak.

 

RGDS

FB

[Number6]

Hi Rosie

 

yeah had quick look at that one you mentioned, but i think the problem will be that i read elsewhere on here that no presidents can be set in the small claims procedure so every case will judged individually. So could go either way on each case.

 

But could help your case if mentioned........

 

Someone please put me straight if i've got the wrong end of the stick so to speak.

 

RGDS

FB

 

You are correct in saying that a legal precedent cannot be set in a county court. But if in your case you can present a previous judgement, even from a county court, then the judge will consider it and it will sway his opinion - human nature.

 

Pete

[funbint]

You are correct in saying that a legal precedent cannot be set in a county court. But if in your case you can present a previous judgement, even from a county court, then the judge will consider it and it will sway his opinion - human nature.

 

Pete

 

Thanks Pete

 

So like I said it could help bolsta your case when mentioned.

 

RGDS

FB

[Number6]

Thanks Pete

 

So like I said it could help bolsta your case when mentioned.

 

RGDS

FB

 

Yes it could. It's a decision by a fellow judge - it's bound to have some influence.

 

Pete

[ecobabe]

actually the wilson case is far more than that, it establishes precedent, as it was eventually settled in the House of Lords; which means that it is legally binding on Court of Appeal and all lower courts. so until another case reaches the House of Lords (and in many cases the House of Lords uses previous case law to determine outcome) and a different decision is reached, the Wilson case is pretty watertight and county courts are legally bound by it. so once again........an agreement which is not properly executed (or lack of one) is a complete defence and even a court cannot enforce it

[paulwlton]

Correct me if i'm wrong, my understanding is only a court can enforce an improperly executed agreement, this can be for several reasons, but the one it cannot enforce is an agreement that hasn't been signed.

 

Paul.

[Number6]

Correct me if i'm wrong, my understanding is only a court can enforce an improperly executed agreement, this can be for several reasons, but the one it cannot enforce is an agreement that hasn't been signed.

 

Paul.

 

Correct

 

Pete

[Acerfan]

Hi,

has anyone got a link to a full copy of the CCA 1974 please? I seem to have lost mine somehow

 

Many thanks

Acerfan

[me_n_my_kids]

do many companies take you to court when you stop paying due to cca non compliance?

[mcuth]

has anyone got a link to a full copy of the CCA 1974 please?

 

Will this do you?:

Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

Cheers

 

Michael

[Acerfan]

Perfect!

 

Thanks very much

[me_n_my_kids]

im nervous.... awaiting all cca replies, due by 28th dec and they will be in default. im right in not counting xmas day and boxing day as part of their 12 working days?

[rosierose]

Oops... Please forgive my earlier mistake.

 

I think what I meant was that a judge would not slap a CCJ on you, but of course *could* make an order that the terms could be enforced as s65(1), but without the order the agreement is totally unenforceable.

 

Sorry if I confused anyone... (other than me)

 

Rosie

[funbint]

Yes it could. It's a decision by a fellow judge - it's bound to have some influence.

 

Pete

 

Thanks again Pete.

 

So if I know that they have no properly executed agreement. Which I do

 

I could issue proceedings against them & use Summary judgement under rule 24 that the claiment belives that the other side has "no real prospect of success" & use the wilson case as the precedent point of law and its summary judgement conclusions.

 

Any thoughts anyone

 

RGDS

FB

[paulwlton]

I have made 2 CCA requests one to the branch where i took out the loan the other to the credit manage department where the loan was transfered, both state they cannot find the agreement.

 

The loan was subjected to a CCJ in 1998, what i need to know, is, when a CCJ is set-aside does the original agreement come back into force requiring the agreed repayments to be made, if this is the case the creditor must have the signed agreement for the court to enforce it.

 

I think i've got a good case to get the ccj set-aside.

[funbint]

I have made 2 CCA requests one to the branch where i took out the loan the other to the credit manage department where the loan was transfered, both state they cannot find the agreement.

 

The loan was subjected to a CCJ in 1998, what i need to know, is, when a CCJ is set-aside does the original agreement come back into force requiring the agreed repayments to be made, if this is the case the creditor must have the signed agreement for the court to enforce it.

 

I think i've got a good case to get the ccj set-aside.

 

 

I concur as you will have a real prospect of success as fresh evidence that you did not have at the original hearing has come to light.

 

The only problem I can forsee are the timescales for appeals.

 

Could you not start proceedings against them to include the ccj?

 

Anyone else got any ideas

 

RGDS

FB

[Peterbard]

I don't understand if the ccj was issued in 1998 it will now have been removed from the register as per the six year rule and if there has been no attempt to chase you for the amount in that time then they cannot persue without permission of the court anyway.

If the entry still appears on your credit report you need to write to the data Manager of the company concerened and to the cra and get it removed imediately.

Also bear in mind that it is illegal to register a default on account after a judgement has been made.

 

Cheers Peter

 

Why wast 65 quid on setting asside a case that no longer is on record?

 

Cheers Peter