Argos Card & JB Debt Recovery

[N.P]

Hi gang,

 

Thanks for the posts.

 

I`m thinking this could be because I haven`t actually made contact with them except on the phone, so maybe they are thinking if I ignore them, they are thinking this will be a pushover?

 

Of course, a `account in dispute` letter will be on it`s way first thing Monday, Special Delivery.

 

Let`s not forget, this account also has charges applied, PPI which was, we`ll say ticked in the shop, and I`ve also noticed their statements have the charges and interest added together as one sum titled `other`, which could mean anything.

 

Fuzzy, what exactly is wrong with your Default Notice? Let me know mate, and I`ll compare it with mine.

 

Catch you all later.

 

Ciao for now.

 

 

 

N.P

[N.P]

Hi PT,

 

I never noticed your post there mate, I thought I was looking at my scan for a moment, LOL.

 

Anyway, sooooo, does the fact that this `Notice` states 21 days when in fact it`s 18 day`s make any difference as to it being valid or not?

 

I`m thinking it could, as it could lead me into thinking I have more time than I actually have.

 

Would I need to attend Court with this one? If so, I could do with some support, if possible?

 

Also, have you noticed their dodgy PO Box Number again? I thought they should be showing a `real` address on their letter`s?

 

Thanks again.

 

 

 

N.P

[N.P]

This may not apply too you N.P., but i wish one of my OH's creditors would issue a SD, i would be in my confort zone then;)

 

Not sure they would like the response though, im sure those that know me could guess its contents:D

 

 

Hi baab,

 

I`m not quite following you here, what exactly are you saying?

[N.P]

PT,

 

Section 268 of the Insolvency Act, does mention at least 3 weeks?

[fuzzybobble]

My DN only gave 11 days, as it was dated on a friday, weekend service etc. Also the default amount consists of about 50% charges and interest on those charges. But after 3 CCA requests, still no paperwork, and if they did produce some, it would be a crap copy of an in store application form.

 

It's weird as I posted about MIL Collections last night and what should land on the doorstep this morning? Yep, you guessed it. MIL after a 2 month gap.

 

It sems I have chosen to ignore their previous attempts to settle this seriously overdue account.

 

They say they WILL pass on to a field agent. (makes a change from people who collect doorsteps anyway)

 

The usual blurb about field agent making report for possible legal action. (ie does he have a house, job, or a car, etc.)

 

More blurb about CCJ's Bailiffs, and an SD.

 

I have 7 days to contact them.

 

And guess what? The letter is dated 20th April, delivered today (sat 25th) and the 7 day deadline is monday. So the only hope of contacting them is by phone this morning or monday.

Don't they realise these tactics do not work with CAG members anymore. And soon the whole population of the country will be wise to it too.

 

If I do respond, it will be with CCA request number 4.

 

When I get Argos in court they are going to have a lot of explaining to do. As well as a huge costs order slapped on them.

 

 

MIL COLLECTIONS Many Idiotic Letters. ;-)

[N.P]

Hi Fuzzy,

 

Goooooood morning. IT`s funny isn`t it? You speak of the devil (just a saying) and he pops up.

 

You could contact them and tell them your quite happy to have a chat with their field agent. Tell them there`s a good 20 acre one a few miles away with lots of cow pats he can play with, tell him you had a few meat feast pizza`s dropped off especially for him, and that there`s also a couple of sheep he can moose

 

I`m definately gonna get something away on Monday, I`ve been going through my threads to dig put my usual `Dispute` letter which all the others have had.

 

Maybe it`s just a scare tactic, or possibly trying to get past the regulations of the CCA 1974, but I definately don`t think they liked my telephone manner. Still, it was better than their`s and I was being honest too, they ARE a bunch of ...................

 

 

 

N.P

[blind-as-a-bat]

Hi baab,

 

I`m not quite following you here, what exactly are you saying?

 

Well it sort of applys as your ballence is relativly low, but it would depend on assets and income.

 

In our case, my OH is already financilay tied to a bankrupt (me) so it has damaged her credit file nearly as much as being bankrupt herself anyway, she has no assets, and income is benefits only, so if she was made bankrupt she would not have to pay anything to her bankrupt estate.

 

Now if you consider that the court fee,s are around £600 to petition a debtor for bankruptcy, on top of wich there is then about £1000 of legal costs, which the creditor must pay, and claim back IF they get the petition granted, from the bankrupts estate, add that to the fact they will get nothing in return for that investment if you have no assets and no surplus income, so unless they know there is say a property with a large junk of equity, they are simply bonkers if they follow through with a stat demand;)

 

On top of that, the oficial reciever takes around £2000 out of any asset 'pot' first, so the creditor will not see a return unless the pot exceeds that.

 

As i said it would depend on your situation, in ours i would simply write back and thank them and tell them to get on with it, bet they wouldnt:p

 

But you have to apply it to your own situation and anything of value you have that they could take.

 

The financial risk however to the creditor is high if they get it wrong and you have nothing, which is why a SD is rarely followed by an actuall petition.

 

The only exceptions are HMRC and Amex, they are known to go through with it as a book keeping excersise:rolleyes:

[N.P]

Mmmmmm, interesting BAAB.

 

Well, I do not own my own property. I live with my gf in her Council House.

 

I am working, and have a car registered in my name which my parents bought me.

 

If things turn nasty I will register my Dad as owner of the car and probably ditch my job. At the end of the day, I can`t see the point in working if they are going to take it.

 

But, then again, like mentioned before, this account is in dispute, and it is beleived the CCA is somewhat unenforceable. Either they are bluffing or they are try to get past the CCA 1974 regulations.

 

Thanks for that, what do you reckon based on my comments?

 

 

 

N.P

[pt2537]

Mmmmmm, interesting BAAB.

 

Well, I do not own my own property. I live with my gf in her Council House.

 

I am working, and have a car registered in my name which my parents bought me.

 

If things turn nasty I will register my Dad as owner of the car and probably ditch my job. At the end of the day, I can`t see the point in working if they are going to take it.

 

But, then again, like mentioned before, this account is in dispute, and it is beleived the CCA is somewhat unenforceable. Either they are bluffing or they are try to get past the CCA 1974 regulations.

 

Thanks for that, what do you reckon based on my comments?

 

 

 

N.P

NP

 

Firstly, the registered keeper is not the owner, so blow that one straight out of the water there, they wont be able to touch the car

 

anyway

 

i wouldnt worry about that, youve got more chance of winning the lottery and having dinner with Saddam Hussein than you have of being made bankrupt

 

if they issue a stat demand then we will assit in helping you fight it and actually, from the cases ive done, you could say, them issueing a SD is a good way for you to make money as when they lose they will have to pay you money for your costs

[N.P]

Heh heh,

 

Thanks for that PT, I`m glad your one of the boys

 

It really makes me feel better knowing there are people like you are the rest of the gang out there who are willing to everyone else, instead of those gangsters who are trying to ruin us over dodgy agreements.

 

I`ll send my Dispute letter Monday, and see what happens next, it has worked well so far.

 

By the way, I am also the registered owner of the car as well as the keeper, my Dad just paid for it. When he paid, he had it delivered to my gf`s house in my name, so basically everything is in my name.

 

Thanks again.

 

 

 

N.P

[pt2537]

Heh heh,

 

Thanks for that PT, I`m glad your one of the boys

 

It really makes me feel better knowing there are people like you are the rest of the gang out there who are willing to everyone else, instead of those gangsters who are trying to ruin us over dodgy agreements.

 

I`ll send my Dispute letter Monday, and see what happens next, it has worked well so far.

 

By the way, I am also the registered owner of the car as well as the keeper, my Dad just paid for it. When he paid, he had it delivered to my gf`s house in my name, so basically everything is in my name.

 

Thanks again.

 

 

 

N.P

no, your dad is the owner if you get my drift,

 

The V5 Log Book is a legal requirement to state who "keeps " the vehicle NOT WHO OWNS IT

 

so no matter waht, if anyone asks you dad purchased it, he owns it, he was the party to the contract, he gave £xxx in consideration for it yada yada yada yes got it?:lol:

[blind-as-a-bat]

NP

 

Firstly, the registered keeper is not the owner, so blow that one straight out of the water there, they wont be able to touch the car

 

anyway

 

i wouldnt worry about that, youve got more chance of winning the lottery and having dinner with Saddam Hussein than you have of being made bankrupt

 

if they issue a stat demand then we will assit in helping you fight it and actually, from the cases ive done, you could say, them issueing a SD is a good way for you to make money as when they lose they will have to pay you money for your costs

 

Agreed PT, there is enough to fight it on, my post was just designed to 'bring the implications' down to size;)

 

One thing re the car, you are correct PT, re ownership as long as the bankrupt is carefull what they say, i have seen it once or twice where a bankrupt has said 'X bought the car for me' or 'gave me the car' ,indicating it was a gift, and therefore ownership was transfered, but as you say its probebly academic anyway for the other reasons;)

[fuzzybobble]

How do you go on if when you bought the car there's no evidence of when and what you paid for it?

 

I'm the registered keeper of my car, but I paid a friend who imports cars cash for the car and having it imported from Japan, then registered and MOT in the UK. Never was any paperwork exchanged or signed apart from the V5 which says when it was imported and the first registered keeper which has my friends name and address on it. Then it changes to my name and address 2 months later.

[N.P]

I know what your saying, BUT, the receipt from the Garage, states MY name at my GF`s address.

 

That is what I`m getting at. My dad simply handed over the money for it, and he had all the paperwork done in my name.

 

Thanks anyway matey.

 

 

 

N.P

[N.P]

Right gang,

 

I`m thinking of sending them this tomorrow if all is ok?

 

 

 

 

ACCOUNT IN SERIOUS DISPUTE

 

 

DO NOT IGNORE THIS LETTER

 

 

 

 

Dear whomever,

 

Reference: ARG Financial Services / Account No. XXXXXX.

 

 

Re: My request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

Further to your recent threat of issuing a Statutory Demand Notice. Thank you for your concern about my finances, I am grateful.

 

May I take this opportunity to remind you that you need to comply with the Companies Act 2006, I believe you have unlawfully missed off the following information from your letterhead, but of course, you already know that. –

 

Registered office:

 

WOODLANDS COURT, TRURO BUSINESS PARK,

TRURO

CORNWALL

TR4 9NH

 

Correspondence address is:

 

PALACE BUILDING

QUAY STREET

TRURO

CORNWALL

TR1 2HE

 

You are formally informed that this account is in Serious Dispute with Argos and contains missold PPI and unlawful charges.

 

It seems your only involvement in this matter is to provide harassment.

 

This account was still in dispute when it was passed to Moorcroft Debt Recover, Fredrickson International Ltd, Bryan Carter Solicitors, JB Debt Recovery, Asset Collection & Investigation Ltd and now, MIL.

 

On 24 July 2007 I wrote to Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd requesting that Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account. Some eight (8) months later, in response to this request, Fredrickson International Ltd supplied me with a mere application form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The cover letter was dated 6th March 2008.

 

The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain any of the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553

 

The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following:

 

1) Number of repayments;

2) Amount of repayments;

3) Frequency and timing of repayments;

4) Dates of repayments;

5) The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974, which states:

 

127(3) 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).

 

This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

Further more, since the prescribed terms referred to above do not appear within the agreement your client has supplied, the agreement is rendered totally unenforceable, as the prescribed terms must be contained within the agreement and not a separate document, case law confirms this opinion

 

I refer you to the judgment of TUCKEY LJ in the case of Wilson and another v Hurstanger Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 299

 

”[11] Schedule 1 to the 1983 Regulations sets out the "information to be contained in documents embodying regulated

consumer credit agreements". Some of this information mirrors the terms prescribed by Schedule 6, but some does not. Contrasting the provisions of the two schedules the Judge said:

 

"33 In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under s 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127(3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest miss-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement. More detailed requirements, which

are designed to ensure that the debtor is made aware, so far as possible, of specified information (including information contained in the

minimum terms) are to be found in Schedule 1."

 

Therefore the prescribed terms cannot be contained within a separate document outside of the agreement

 

In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

As it stands, the document supplied by your client is not a valid credit agreement nor is it enforceable by any court

 

 

What I Require

 

Firstly, I require all correspondence in writing from here on; any persistent attempts to contact me by phone again will be reported to Trading Standards, the Financial ombudsman service and the Office of Fair Trading

 

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that your clients do not hold a signed copy of a credit agreement containing the prescribed terms. Therefore the fact that they do not hold such document means that you cannot obtain an enforcement order in court. The case of Wilson-v-FCT sets this out as previously referred to above.

 

Should you believe that you have grounds to enforce this agreement, please provide me with a signed copy of the credit agreement that you would consider relying upon? Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40

 

Since the agreement your clients have supplied as it stands is unenforceable, should you be unable to produce a compliant agreement it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for you to write the debt off. I suggest you give serious consideration to this as any attempt of litigation will be vigorously defended and I will counter claim for all quantifiable damages, including harassment.

 

I respectfully request a response to this letter in 14 days.

I trust this out lines the situation.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Me

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Any comments people?

 

 

N.P

[fuzzybobble]

Needs some smiley faces after the long list of DCA's that have failed to provide a CCA

[N.P]

Needs some smiley faces after the long list of DCA's that have failed to provide a CCA

 

They might think I`m being funny if I do that, and then issue a SD, LOL.

 

Hang on, our lass is asleep, now`s me chance to nick her Grape Juice

[pecky1]

Hi NP

Keep up the good fight hope your account in dispute letter stops them in thier tracks, Still fighting Cabot with mine. so keep us updated.

Pecky1:)

[N.P]

Why not remind MIL that they need to comply with the Companies Act 2006. Here's the information they've unlawfully missed off their letterhead:

 

Registered office:

 

WOODLANDS COURT, TRURO BUSINESS

PARK, TRURO

CORNWALL

TR4 9NH

 

Their correspondence address is:

 

Palace Building

Quay Street

TRURO

Cornwall

TR1 2HE

 

According to their entry on the OFT database, MIL's 'legal formation' status is as a charity or trade union - could they have provided incorrect information? I strongly suspect that 'Paul Edwards' is really Alan or Karina Davis, the pair that own the company. As if operating a DCA wasn't enough, MIL are apparently also marketing consultants - what busy people!

 

 

SC,

 

Could you point to the links of the OFT Database you refer to and also where did you find their address which was missing from their letterhead?

 

I`ve been trying to find the Database but I can`t seem to find it.

 

Thanks dude

 

 

 

N.P

[fuzzybobble]

They might think I`m being funny if I do that, and then issue a SD, LOL.

 

Hang on, our lass is asleep, now`s me chance to nick her Grape Juice

 

Is that grape juice that comes in a bottle with a cork in it?

 

That settles it, tomorrow MIL will be getting that letter and a list of failed DCA's with a row of smilies after it. Then they can send me an SD. I could do with a nice cheque for setaside costs.

[N.P]

Is that grape juice that comes in a bottle with a cork in it?

 

That settles it, tomorrow MIL will be getting that letter and a list of failed DCA's with a row of smilies after it. Then they can send me an SD. I could do with a nice cheque for setaside costs.

 

Naaa, just a carton of normal Red Grape Juice, she quites likes it, but so do I, slurp, burp

[ScarletPimpernel]

I think the letter is too long.

 

Stick to the facts and the points you need to stop them in their tracks. I don't think it's necessary to quote chunks of law - let them spend their own time looking it up.

 

 

Dear Clowns

 

Re: Acct no.xxxxxxx

 

I refer to your letter dated (date), which included the threat of issuing a Statutory Demand Notice. I do not acknowledge any debt to you or any company you claim to represent.

 

This alleged debt is disputed on the grounds that it includes unfair and/or unlawful charges. In addition the PPI connected to the account was missold and I will be claiming a full refund of all premiums paid. I do not understand why your clients, who are well aware of the dispute, continue to pass the account to one debt collection agency after another, knowing that failing to suspend collection activity when a debt is disputed is contrary to the Office of Fair Trading Guidance on Debt Collection.

 

Furthermore, your clients remain in default of a formal request dated (date) made pursuant to s.78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and s.78(6) therefore applies. Although your client failed to comply fully with my request, they did send a document they averred to be a true copy of the credit agreement, which did not contain the terms prescribed in s.61 of the Act and is therefore unenforceable under s.127(3).

 

In the circumstances, your threat to issue a Statutory Demand is contrary to s.7(2)e. of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. Be assured that if, notwithstanding the above, you issue a Statutory Demand I will bring your failure to comply with your legal and regulatory obligations to the Court's attention when I have the SD set aside with costs.

 

You should take this letter as a formal complaint about your breaches of the OFT Guidance and Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008. I require you to deal with my complaint under the complaint procedure required by the Consumer Credit Act 2006. You should send me a copy of the procedure without delay.

 

Take notice that I require any further communication in this matter to be in writing. For the avoidance of doubt, this means that you must not telephone me again; if you do, I will consider your actions amount to harassment and respond accordingly.

 

If you do not understand any part of this letter, you should seek professional advice.

 

Yours etc.

 

 

Don't tell them about their breach of the Companies Act - just report them. You can do this by email to Companies House.

[N.P]

Well, that`s a good one SP,

 

I like that, did you have that saved? I`ll send that and save it.

 

I even like the Dear Clowns, shall I leave that in? LOL

[N.P]

Heh heh, I like that letter.

 

It looks good on paper, especially with the `Dear Clowns`

[Help48xxx]

Ah...that elusive Scarlet Pimpernel...

 

nice to see you again...and nice work with the letter. I'd be happy to send that if it were me.

 

Either way NP, you wil get your point across and get some time to ponder, with grape juice perhaps!

 

xx