SLC Cannot Supply The Original Agreement

[bill-k]

Hi, this is indeed an interesting thread for me. Can I please ask a question here which I haven't seen discussed, yet ? I don't want to detract from the ongoing stuff, but maybe we can multi-task for a while !!

 

I have 2 years left to run of an IVA which I entered into before I had heard of CAG. Apart from a couple of small overdrafts, the creditors to this are all credit cards and catalogue firms. If I send off my CCA request for contract copy to them all, and they all (or mostly) can't produce it, then can I apply to have the IVA "dissolved" ? On the grounds, of course, that the debts were never enforceable, and my IVA was taken out due to a "mistaken belief - honestly held." ?

 

This would really make a difference to my life if it were possible.

 

Thanks, guys.

[noomill060]

Yes cat, persue this to the fullest extent that you can.

 

Morgan Stanley would.

[noomill060]

**has vision of the lovely Keira Kenny being dragged away from her desk screaming and in chains**

 

[angry cat]

Thanks noomill060,

 

I am so MAD at MS, this firm has treated me so badly:(

 

It is absolutely scandalous how these Financial Institutions treat the consumer and I am not putting up with their "Bad, Poor Business Methods" any longer......Be very sure that I will pursue the matter, hopefully the OFT/ Trading Standards will take "Action" regarding the offence. In any event, I will pursue the matter through the civil courts as well.

 

Love AC

[Peterbard]

If the creditor fails to comply with section 1, which relates to supplying a copy of the agreement to the debtor on request, he is not entitled, while the default continues to enforce the agreement. Therefore you could try and argue that the trader cannot continue to pursue you all the while they are unable to provide a copy of the agreement.

Well done AC you have proved that they can't just send any old tat out and say it is a copy of your agreement. I would encourage the T.S. to persue this as well as registering your own complaint.

The reply from them contained a lot of information and i shall be coppying it for further use.

 

Keep up the good Work

Peter

[angry cat]

Hi Guy's

 

I have given permission to my local TS to pass on my details, which will enable them to advise the London Borough of Tower Hamlets Trading Standards, about the details of my complaint, due to the fact that MS are based in that TS area.

 

Obviously, the London Borough of Tower Hamlets Trading Standards will have to investigate/validate the facts, as to whether the offence has occured and if MS have breached the CCA 1974, they will have to consider what action that they will take.

 

We will see?....plus there is another issue here. If they (TS) agree that an offence has occured, then any Action that might be taken against MS, will be funded by Public Monies!

 

Sigh..!

 

AC

 

ps - Noomill060, re: dragging the darling Karla Kenny away from her desk in Chains screaming..!..LOL...is an interesting thought/scene in my mind. However, I asked TS "Who could/would be deemed to be the offender, answer:- "The Controlling Mind" at Morgan Stanley Bank.

I will leave you with that thought!?

[noomill060]

"The Controlling Mind" - Hmmm...

 

Sounds like they have a pickled brain in a jar with electrodes connected to it, controlling the show...

 

Yikes!

[veryannoyed]

The ultimate responsibility in Law for the actions of a Company lies at the feet of its directors as far as I am aware...

 

Generally the public are fobbed off with the idea that as it is a company and not an individual person, there is no-one to be held responsible.

 

HOWEVER, if it was a case of someone being seriously injured or killed as a result of negligence of a company, for example, HSE would drag a director or two into a courtroom and prosecute them - and probably succeed in jailing them. Indeed, there has relatively recently been a new name for just this type of offence "corporate manslaughter"

 

So I don't think companies can simply hide behind the shiny brass plaque on the front of their building and say "whoah, we're a company, we don't know who is ultimately responsible for your problem"

 

In heated telephone disputes with companies, especially big PLCs like banks, utility companies etc. I often DEMAND to be put through to a director's office, informing the mouthpiece on the other end of the phone that as they are a public company of which I am a customer, I have a legal right to speak to a director, and if they refuse I shall report them to Companies House. Now, I don't actually know if that is right or not, but it has never ever failed to get me put through to someone VERY high up in an organisation. Of course, bank directors are never available on the phone as they are "in a meeting" but I have often spoken directly to director's secretaries, and had letters then from director's offices (and got things sorted!)

 

That's my tip for the day...

[JonCris]

Problem is there has not yet to my knowledge been a succesfull prosecution for corporate manslaughter. I think Corus in Wales would have been a good place to start

[soli2006]

Hi everyone - going off subject a little on one of these questions.

 

I have had a reply from the head office of my creditor in response to my CCA follow up saying i wanted a 'true SIGNED copy' of my agreement. Basically they have now passed the buck to their 'branch office' and will 'be in touch shortly'. Up to them, they are now past the initial 12 days from my CCA & all i have had is a copy of 'what the agreement would have looked like'.

 

On another subject - a little off topic - I also have an ongoing S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) with the same company. All they initially sent me was a copy of my statement. So i wrote back saying that i wanted ALL documentation relating to my account, a breakdown of charges, evidence of manual intervention, and details on my PPI agreement. They wrote yesterday simply saying that 'letter £25, phone call £15....' and so on (thats an explanation of charges apparently). And they enclosed a list along the lines of '2/5 - phoned, 5/5 - phoned again, 10/5 - sent letter'........and so on (as 'evidence' of manual intervention). Now - is that 'evidence' or do they have to supply copies of the letters they claim to have sent, and telephone records to prove they phoned - and is there any way they can prove they made a 'personal visit' at all? Surely anyone could write a two page list saying they made calls, wrote letters, paid visits - it doesnt prove they did.

 

The other thing is my PPI. Forget for a minute the fact i was told 'no insurance, no loan' - the fact is that they sold me this, wrote it up, got me to sign the forms, took the monthly premiums, and so on. Y et now thet say 'the Personal Protection Insurance is administered by XXXXXX Ltd and as such we have no respinsibilty to give any details. We suggest you contact them directly for this information'. Surely that can't be right? I don't see why i should have to do another S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) (at £10) to the insurers for a policy THEY sold to me & for which THEY collected the premiums.

 

Can anyone please give me advice on all the above things? I really need help as to where i go next.

[Number6]

Hi everyone - going off subject a little on one of these questions.

 

I have had a reply from the head office of my creditor in response to my CCA follow up saying i wanted a 'true SIGNED copy' of my agreement. Basically they have now passed the buck to their 'branch office' and will 'be in touch shortly'. Up to them, they are now past the initial 12 days from my CCA & all i have had is a copy of 'what the agreement would have looked like'.

 

They have complied with your (presumably) Section 77 or 78 request. The Act as modified says that signature boxes, signatures and personal information can be omitted from any copies of documents sent under any section of the Act. So if you have a copy of what the application form would have looked like then they have complied.

 

You are certainly able to ask for a copy of the original signed and executed agreement, they would have to have this if they went to court anyway, but there is no timescale set out for them to send this; they could take six months if they wanted to.

 

On another subject - a little off topic - I also have an ongoing S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) with the same company. All they initially sent me was a copy of my statement. So i wrote back saying that i wanted ALL documentation relating to my account, a breakdown of charges, evidence of manual intervention, and details on my PPI agreement. They wrote yesterday simply saying that 'letter £25, phone call £15....' and so on (thats an explanation of charges apparently). And they enclosed a list along the lines of '2/5 - phoned, 5/5 - phoned again, 10/5 - sent letter'........and so on (as 'evidence' of manual intervention). Now - is that 'evidence' or do they have to supply copies of the letters they claim to have sent, and telephone records to prove they phoned - and is there any way they can prove they made a 'personal visit' at all? Surely anyone could write a two page list saying they made calls, wrote letters, paid visits - it doesnt prove they did.

 

The Data Protection Act S7 states:

 

" 7. - (1) Subject to the following provisions of this section and to sections 8 and 9, an individual is entitled-

 

(a) to be informed by any data controller whether personal data of which that individual is the data subject are being processed by or on behalf of that data controller,

(b) if that is the case, to be given by the data controller a description of-

(i) the personal data of which that individual is the data subject,

(ii) the purposes for which they are being or are to be processed, and

(iii) the recipients or classes of recipients to whom they are or may be disclosed,

© to have communicated to him in an intelligible form-

(i) the information constituting any personal data of which that individual is the data subject, and

(ii) any information available to the data controller as to the source of those data, and

(d) where the processing by automatic means of personal data of which that individual is the data subject for the purpose of evaluating matters relating to him such as, for example, his performance at work, his creditworthiness, his reliability or his conduct, has constituted or is likely to constitute the sole basis for any decision significantly affecting him, to be informed by the data controller of the logic involved in that decision-taking."

 

The important bit is in red. IMO that means copies of letters, memos and telephone recordings or transcripts.

 

Don't forget that an S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) is not a request for "evidence" of any sort, merely a copy of your data that the company holds. If they say that they have given you all the data they hold then that's that if and until it goes to court.

 

The other thing is my PPI. Forget for a minute the fact i was told 'no insurance, no loan' - the fact is that they sold me this, wrote it up, got me to sign the forms, took the monthly premiums, and so on. Y et now thet say 'the Personal Protection Insurance is administered by XXXXXX Ltd and as such we have no respinsibilty to give any details. We suggest you contact them directly for this information'. Surely that can't be right? I don't see why i should have to do another S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) (at £10) to the insurers for a policy THEY sold to me & for which THEY collected the premiums.

 

Again they only have to send you data that they hold about you, they don't have to collect anything from third parties. If they passed your PPI application to a third party then they are probably correct in telling you to contact the third party directly.

 

Sorry if this isn't what you wanted to read but I must emphasise that a Data Protection Act S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) is not a request for legal evidence, merely a request to see the data held on you by the company you have applied to.

 

Pete

[Peterbard]

I have had a reply from the head office of my creditor in response to my CCA follow up saying i wanted a 'true SIGNED copy' of my agreement. Basically they have now passed the buck to their 'branch office' and will 'be in touch shortly'. Up to them, they are now past the initial 12 days from my CCA & all i have had is a copy of 'what the agreement would have looked like'.

 

I Have said this before don't accept it send it back and tell them it is not a copy of any agreement you have signed.The 1557 reg only says may withhold the signature if they had the orriginal why would they?

It would be easy enough for them to prove all they would have to do is send a copy of the orriginal signed contract if they had it.

Then if it went to court let them explain why they are wasting court time.

Peter

[Number6]

I have had a reply from the head office of my creditor in response to my CCA follow up saying i wanted a 'true SIGNED copy' of my agreement. Basically they have now passed the buck to their 'branch office' and will 'be in touch shortly'. Up to them, they are now past the initial 12 days from my CCA & all i have had is a copy of 'what the agreement would have looked like'.

 

I Have said this before don't accept it send it back and tell them it is not a copy of any agreement you have signed.The 1557 reg only says may withhold the signature if they had the orriginal why would they?

It would be easy enough for them to prove all they would have to do is send a copy of the orriginal signed contract if they had it.

Then if it went to court let them explain why they are wasting court time.

Peter

 

Peter, I know what you're saying and I don't disagree but lets not muddy the waters please.

 

Soli2006's question (the first part) referred to compliance with S77/78 of the CCA 1974. His lender has complied with S77/78 as amended by the Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents Regulations. Therefor soli cannot complain to anyone about his lenders non-compliance.

 

Why a lender would send out a "generic" document rather than a copy of the original is a totally different question and I would ask for a copy of the original also that position. BUT, requesting a copy of the original agreement once a "generic" copy has been supplied falls outside the remit of S77 / 78 and therefore there is no applicable timescale for the document to be supplied within.

 

Pete

[angry cat]

I take the view, that if the Creditor actually has the true and executed signed credit agreement, then they would have sent you a copy.

 

It may well be that the creditor cannot find the agreement at the moment?

However, the fact is that the creditor is in default of the CCA 1974 by not sending the requested doc. copy within the timescale allowed.

 

IMO sending out a template copy is simply a get-out.

 

AC

[soli2006]

Again they only have to send you data that they hold about you, they don't have to collect anything from third parties. If they passed your PPI application to a third party then they are probably correct in telling you to contact the third party directly.

 

I appreciate that, but to say they have NO data regarding my PPI is a nonsense. THEY collect the payments from me each month as part of my repayments of the overall loan. They MUST send that money somewhere - i.e. to the insurer. At the very least, they have to have the policy number or else how could they make payments to the third party? Do they simply collect the money each month & say 'I wonder what this is and where it goes?' Of course they don't, so saying 'we have no data whatsoever regarding th PPI' is a plain untruth. Either that or there isn't a policy & they ARE simply pocketing the payments.

[Number6]

I take the view, that if the Creditor actually has the true and executed signed credit agreement, then they would have sent you a copy.

 

It may well be that the creditor cannot find the agreement at the moment?

 

I agree.

 

However, the fact is that the creditor is in default of the CCA 1974 by not sending the requested doc. copy within the timescale allowed.

 

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.

 

IMO sending out a template copy is simply a get-out.

 

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

 

Pete

[Number6]

I appreciate that, but to say they have NO data regarding my PPI is a nonsense. THEY collect the payments from me each month as part of my repayments of the overall loan. They MUST send that money somewhere - i.e. to the insurer. At the very least, they have to have the policy number or else how could they make payments to the third party? Do they simply collect the money each month & say 'I wonder what this is and where it goes?' Of course they don't, so saying 'we have no data whatsoever regarding th PPI' is a plain untruth. Either that or there isn't a policy & they ARE simply pocketing the payments.

 

You have to understand what section 7 of the Data Protection Act actually allows a Data Subject to ask for. Data Protection Act S7 is not a "catch-all" to allow you to request absolutely any information, only certain types of data come under the remit of the Data Protection Act.

 

Under the Data Protection Act the information you are allowed to see must comply with the following:

 

a) The data is processed automatically.

 

b) Contained within a "Relevant Filing System" as defined by the DPA

 

c) Contains your data

 

d) Does not allow anyone else to be identified unless that other person has given their consent for disclosure to you.

 

The Act describes the relevant data that it covers thus:

 

1. - (1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires-

 

"data" means information which-

 

(a) is being processed by means of equipment operating automatically in response to instructions given for that purpose,

 

(b) is recorded with the intention that it should be processed by means of such equipment,

 

© is recorded as part of a relevant filing system or with the intention that it should form part of a relevant filing system, or

 

(d) does not fall within paragraph (a), (b) or © but forms part of an accessible record as defined by section 68;

 

So it may well be that they do have some other information but if it doesn't comply with the above then they do not have to let you have it. For example there might be a box of documents pertaining to your PPI but if the documents are not in a relevant filing system then you don't get to see it.

 

You could write back and ask them to explain why they have no information, or if they do ask them why they are not prepared to release it to you?

 

Pete

[noomill060]

Well my DCA seems to have forgotten all about me since my CCA request and now appears determined to want to wave goodbye to any chance of recovering anything of what they claimed I owed them.

 

Its been unenforcable for near two months and not a squeak out of them.

 

Only thing is its going to deprive me of the satisfaction of writing:

 

Defendant denies any agreement, if creditor shows such agreement to exist, defendant will aver that debt is unenforceable:

 

1) Creditor failed to comply to CCA s.77 request within 12 working days and xxx days later is in criminal default of said Act. Total defence under CCA 1974.

 

2) Alleged debt made up of unenforceable punative penalty charges and interest charged theron and is thus errrrrrrrr..... unenforcable!

[noomill060]

Shocking weather we're having, isnt it?

[Number6]

**thinks- they are attempting to obtain pecuniary advantage by deception in reality, arent they?**

 

I hear what you say but I don't know that area of law anywhere near well enough to comment.

 

Pete

[noomill060]

Neither do I, so I'll just edit my last contribution and leave that battle for another time.

[Number6]

Shocking weather we're having, isnt it?

 

LOL!!!

 

Pete

[noomill060]

Just dont fancy sharing a cell with non-compliant SAR Data Controllers...

[paulwlton]

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.

[tamadus]

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.