SLC Cannot Supply The Original Agreement

[soli2006]

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.

 

I think thats the route I'll go down. After all, its non-enforceable & they must know that. Without a signed copy, they won't get a bean out of me, and they must be aware of that. Only thing is, they are adamant they have complied with the CCA request, so deny that they will go into default. I'll report them anyway & see what the authorities make of it all when we reach that stage. How though do people end up with the debt 'zeroed' & money paid back?

[noomill060]

" she stated if your saying the debt has never existed then this is a fraudulent claim"

 

 

Oh the irony- how about the charges and interest illegally included in the debts they claim we owe them?

 

Obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception- the deception being that these charges are a true pre-estimate of costs suffered and that we accepted them when we signed the terms and conditions.

 

If we wanted to be really nasty

[soli2006]

If & when i need to make a complaint to the OFT for criminal default, who exactly do i complain to? Is there paperwork I need to complete? Or a standard letter? Should i write to the creditor after the '12 days plus one month' period that leads to such a default has expired?

[Peterbard]

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.

 

I have sent the followig as an addition to the CCA request on a couple of occasions.

 

I understand that under section 3 (b) of SI 1983 /1557 you may omit the signature box from the copy. I would point out that it would to be impossible to verify the validity of such a document as an exact copy of the executed agreement as required by section77of he act.

I therefore would suggest that a true copy including my signature be sent.

If I am unable to verify the document the terms of 1974 section 77 act have not been met and the timescale for production of the documentation would still apply.

 

I hope it is of some use.

Peter

[noomill060]

Do nothing until the 30 calendar days from default have expired. In the mean time read through this entire thread. all the info is in here.

 

There is a school of thought which say- do nothing. the ball is in their court, let them prove there is an agreement, risking a fine, imprisonment and a judge cancelling the debt because of their criminallity.

 

This is one I am following. If they want to risk it, let them try.

 

The actual debt, if there is one, is unenforceable anyway, as it includes unlawful charges and interest, unless they want to justify their costs in a court, which,as we all know, they would rather stick their heads in a mincer than do.

[soli2006]

I have sent the followig as an addition to the CCA request on a couple of occasions.

 

I understand that under section 3 (b) of SI 1983 /1557 you may omit the signature box from the copy. I would point out that it would to be impossible to verify the validity of such a document as an exact copy of the executed agreement as required by section77of he act.

I therefore would suggest that a true copy including my signature be sent.

If I am unable to verify the document the terms of 1974 section 77 act have not been met and the timescale for production of the documentation would still apply.Peter

 

I used that in my follow up letter, and received a 'this has been passed to the local branch for investigation' letter in reply. I shall see what happens now, let the 30 days elapse then decide wheter to adopt a 'do nothing' approach or to report them.

[soli2006]

Do nothing until the 30 calendar days from default have expired. In the mean time read through this entire thread. all the info is in here.

 

There is a school of thought which say- do nothing. the ball is in their court, let them prove there is an agreement, risking a fine, imprisonment and a judge cancelling the debt because of their criminallity.

 

This is one I am following. If they want to risk it, let them try.

 

The actual debt, if there is one, is unenforceable anyway, as it includes unlawful charges and interest, unless they want to justify their costs in a court, which,as we all know, they would rather stick their heads in a mincer than do.

 

I'll decide once the 30 days are up. Tick, tock...............

[Number6]

Please don't misinterpret my comments anyone, I'm not in any way defending the lenders or their tactics.

 

I am only pointing out that the law allows them to send an unsigned "generic" copy in response to your S77/78 request in order to comply. This is completely seperate to the enforceability or otherwise of the agreement.

 

My view is that if the lender sends me a "generic" document then they don't have the original signed copy. I have written to all bar one of my CC companies telling them that IMO there is no agreement and I'm not paying them any more.

 

As an aside one of my major "alleged creditors" that is in "criminal default" has now written to me stating:

 

"Your current balance is scheduled to be written off as bad debt imminently"

 

 

Pete

[Peterbard]

I used that in my follow up letter, and received a 'this has been passed to the local branch for investigation' letter in reply. I shall see what happens now, let the 30 days elapse then decide wheter to adopt a 'do nothing' approach or to report them.

 

This is code for no we didn't send a copy of the orriginal because we couldn't be bothered or we don't have it so we will get the local branch to look for it since it is obvious you are not going to be fobbed off.

 

Great

Peter

[noomill060]

Good news number 6!

[Number6]

Good news number 6!

 

I thought so!

 

Pete

[Peterbard]

I am only pointing out that the law allows them to send and unsigned "generic" copy in response to your S77/78 request in order to comply. This is completely seperate to the enforceability or otherwise of the agreement.

 

I hope no one thinks i being pedantic but the law (sec77 )does not permit a generic copy,it implicitly requires a copy of the executed orriginal containing all the prescribed terms of the orriginal allbeit without the sigature box.

 

The word generic means a general all purpose document not what is required at all.

 

Regs

Peter

 

Peter

[angry cat]

soli2006-

I agree with tamadus, don't bother with sending off another request. Just contact your local TS and register your complaint, if TS attempt to fob you off, press them to escalate your complaint to a higher level.

When I advised my TS of MS's offence, they had to obtain advice on the matter and then emailed me back.

 

Incidentally Guy's & paulwlton-

 

MS registered a Default against me even though the amount stated on the Notice of Default (NOD) was less than MS owed me in penalty charges. I have now accepted their settlement. However, I would NOT accept any of their imposed charges and demanded that the Unfair, Unjustified, Unwarranted Default be removed from my CRA credit files.

I also wrote letters of complaint to both Equifax & Experian escalation departments challenging their right to process my personal data, the result was that a Notice of Dispute was placed upon my credit files.

However, recently I made an audit of both files and everything relating to MS had gone, yes all payment history relation to MS has been removed from the files!

This of course, does not mean that the alleged debt has gone, which is another matter, as I am in Dispute over the value of the debt caused by useless PPI + interest; about to be challenged. To reiterate, I am at present waiting on TS's investigations re the MS breach of the CCA 1974, a criminal offence.

 

It really does help to Complain....basically, if you throw enough mud at the wall, some of it has to stick!!

 

Also remember, that by following the courts overriding objective protocols, you can satisfy a Judge that you attempted to resolve matters prior to taking Action.

 

Please note, the above is simply my opinion based upon my own experience.

 

Love AC

[Acerfan]

Hi All & Seasons greetings:)

 

Wonder if anyone's got any thoughts on this...

 

Sent CCA request off to my bank for copy of loan agreement to which they responded with what seems to be the original pre-contract information. I then wrote to them saying that I wanted a copy of the fully executed, signed agreement. Their 14 days + one calendar month expired on 20th December on which day I received an answerphone message from them asking me to ring them back. They called again yesterday & told me i couldn't have it because they needed it for their own records, but they could post me a signed copy which would be stamped as a certified true copy of the original agreement.

 

Firstly, does telephone contact mean that they have still complied within the timeframe? (they did give me the option of collecting from my branch which I'm not able to do)

 

Secondly, I don't see how they would be able to send me a signed copy of the agreement as their agreement forms have no signature box (I have a copy of another agreement with that bank)

 

The next payment is due to debit from my account on the 28th. Would I be within my rights to cancel the DD? Or should I wait to see what they send through (which will probably not come through by post until after then)

 

Any help would be much appreciated

[bill-k]

Ace, I don't think that they can be considered to have complied with the CCA until you have received the true copy of the contract. If they left it until the last day to call and tell you that they still hadn't posted it, then that does not, IMO, constitute compliance.

 

When you do eventually get whatever they're sending, then it looks like it won't be what you asked for (as it doesn't appear to exist), and therefore still non-compliance. But you gotta wait & see, I suppose.

 

Why not cancel the DD, if it seems pretty certain that there is no signed agreement. If, when their "document" reaches you, it seems that they have pulled a rabbit out of the hat, you can always make a one-off online banking payment or send a cheque for the DD amount to cover yourself.

 

JMHO.

[tamadus]

I used that in my follow up letter, and received a 'this has been passed to the local branch for investigation' letter in reply. I shall see what happens now, let the 30 days elapse then decide wheter to adopt a 'do nothing' approach or to report them.

 

I love it when they pass these requests around their vaqrious departments, as it means they are still following the stalling tactics which are now inbred into them. The more they stall a CCA request the closer they get to that offence date

[tamadus]

Please don't misinterpret my comments anyone, I'm not in any way defending the lenders or their tactics.

 

I am only pointing out that the law allows them to send an unsigned "generic" copy in response to your S77/78 request in order to comply. This is completely seperate to the enforceability or otherwise of the agreement.

 

My view is that if the lender sends me a "generic" document then they don't have the original signed copy. I have written to all bar one of my CC companies telling them that IMO there is no agreement and I'm not paying them any more.

 

As an aside one of my major "alleged creditors" that is in "criminal default" has now written to me stating:

 

"Your current balance is scheduled to be written off as bad debt imminently"

 

:D :D

 

Pete

 

Nice result Pete.

 

I lay odds they will pass it to a DCA to try and collect now though. Writing it off simply means they wash their hands of it knowing they can't get anywhere. A DCA however may start the whole process again.

 

All you need now is to get any default removed

[tamadus]

soli2006-

I agree with tamadus, don't bother with sending off another request. Just contact your local TS and register your complaint, if TS attempt to fob you off, press them to escalate your complaint to a higher level.

When I advised my TS of MS's offence, they had to obtain advice on the matter and then emailed me back.

 

Incidentally Guy's & paulwlton-

 

MS registered a Default against me even though the amount stated on the Notice of Default (NOD) was less than MS owed me in penalty charges. I have now accepted their settlement. However, I would NOT accept any of their imposed charges and demanded that the Unfair, Unjustified, Unwarranted Default be removed from my CRA credit files.

I also wrote letters of complaint to both Equifax & Experian escalation departments challenging their right to process my personal data, the result was that a Notice of Dispute was placed upon my credit files.

However, recently I made an audit of both files and everything relating to MS had gone, yes all payment history relation to MS has been removed from the files!

This of course, does not mean that the alleged debt has gone, which is another matter, as I am in Dispute over the value of the debt caused by useless PPI + interest; about to be challenged. To reiterate, I am at present waiting on TS's investigations re the MS breach of the CCA 1974, a criminal offence.

 

It really does help to Complain....basically, if you throw enough mud at the wall, some of it has to stick!!

 

Also remember, that by following the courts overriding objective protocols, you can satisfy a Judge that you attempted to resolve matters prior to taking Action.

 

Please note, the above is simply my opinion based upon my own experience.

 

Love AC

 

Nice work AC, I'm about to send a complaint to TS so may well come to you for some help with it

[tamadus]

Hi All & Seasons greetings:)

 

Wonder if anyone's got any thoughts on this...

 

Sent CCA request off to my bank for copy of loan agreement to which they responded with what seems to be the original pre-contract information. I then wrote to them saying that I wanted a copy of the fully executed, signed agreement. Their 14 days + one calendar month expired on 20th December on which day I received an answerphone message from them asking me to ring them back. They called again yesterday & told me i couldn't have it because they needed it for their own records, but they could post me a signed copy which would be stamped as a certified true copy of the original agreement.

 

Firstly, does telephone contact mean that they have still complied within the timeframe? (they did give me the option of collecting from my branch which I'm not able to do)

 

Secondly, I don't see how they would be able to send me a signed copy of the agreement as their agreement forms have no signature box (I have a copy of another agreement with that bank)

 

The next payment is due to debit from my account on the 28th. Would I be within my rights to cancel the DD? Or should I wait to see what they send through (which will probably not come through by post until after then)

 

Any help would be much appreciated

 

Two things come to mind here. First you can't have a COPY because they need it lol then you can.

 

I would be inclined to delay cancelling the DD as long as possible or even allow it to go through this month. It's unlikely they are going to produce the document but lets not enter into their murky grey areas. By allowing them a little more time you can be clearly seen as whiter than white, which makes them even muckier.

 

The flip side is that if you cancel the DD and they do produce it you can always make a debit card payment.

[Number6]

Nice result Pete.

 

I lay odds they will pass it to a DCA to try and collect now though. Writing it off simply means they wash their hands of it knowing they can't get anywhere. A DCA however may start the whole process again.

 

All you need now is to get any default removed

 

They may well try to pass it to a DCA...... but what are they going to pass on? If they couldn't send me the original agreement then q.e.d. there is no agreement and therefore nothing to pass to a DCA.

 

Any DCA that is silly enough to buy the debt will be speedily told that they need to produce the appropriate paperwork.

 

Pete

[Peterbard]

Thinking about the section 77 stuuation regarding signatures i noticed one or two have been aplying for a copy of section 60 copys. These unfortunately are still covered by the section 3 of the SI and does not have to contain a signature box however if you look at the SI section 63(1) is not!!

and a copy of this document would have to contain the signature.

"any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancelable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act"

This of course is intended to be Pre-contractual but therei s nothing ther to say so. Poetic justic if you know what i mean.

A loophole?Maybee

 

Petr

[tamadus]

They may well try to pass it to a DCA...... but what are they going to pass on? If they couldn't send me the original agreement then q.e.d. there is no agreement and therefore nothing to pass to a DCA.

 

Any DCA that is silly enough to buy the debt will be speedily told that they need to produce the appropriate paperwork.

 

Pete

 

I fully agree with you but we know how these companies clutch at straws

[tamadus]

Thinking about the section 77 stuuation regarding signatures i noticed one or two have been aplying for a copy of section 60 copys. These unfortunately are still covered by the section 3 of the SI and does not have to contain a signature box however if you look at the SI section 63(1) is not!!

and a copy of this document would have to contain the signature.

"any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancelable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act"

 

This of course is intended to be Pre-contractual but therei s nothing ther to say so. Poetic justic if you know what i mean.

 

A loophole?Maybee

 

Petr

 

Finally somebody has noticed something that I have been mulling over and come to the same conclussion

 

It's that cancellable, executed bit that make sme think it might not work as most of the agreements we are concerned with were exactly that.

[Peterbard]

T

 

Yes most of the agreements we work with are as you say and if you read the act again it is precisley those that are required to have a signature or rather are not covered by the section 3 instruction.

 

 

Cheers Peter

 

Regards Peter

[Peterbard]

T

Just as an observation this particular document is the one you get when you first sign your agreement so it has to have your signature on it.

This is the agrement we wanted a copy of under section77-79.

If they say they cannot produce the signed executed 63(1) then there is no agreement and therfore the contract is unenforceable by virtue of 127 section 4.

 

 

What do you think

Peter

 

That is untill April 6th

Petr