Barclaycard v Questioner – no 1

[questioner]

Barclaycard v Questioner – no 1

 

I have just made complaints to BC and the authorities about BC.

 

I had been paying BC tokens of a quid per month. However, they later (last year) set Crudite Solutions on me and I had a great deal of stress due to this.

 

In December I CCA’d CS and they wrote to BC for docs.

 

Nothing came back but a letter off CS to say they had closed the file (April 09) and given it back to BC.

 

Shortly after BC set another DCA on me – Robinson Way.

 

Again I protested and RW managed to get a crappy and illegible terms and condition sheet off BC. I told RW that it was no good and so they also later closed the file and gave it back to BC.

 

Point is that BC are in dispute and yet still sending this around the houses to collectors.

 

I have written in protest to BC over this and demanded they close the file which seems to go back to 2000 if I can believe the terms sheet.

 

It has been in dispute since December 2008.

 

Complaints have gone in to authorities.

[dx100uk]

sadly quite typical for BC

 

have a read of a few threads there

 

dx

[questioner]

sadly quite typical for BC

 

have a read of a few threads there

 

dx

 

The term headless chicken comes to mind for although this account has been in dispute since December I have just - following my complaint received a letter off BC with illegible Terms and Conditions sheet saying this complies with my request.

 

Next I tell them it is NOT complient and then they send their standard - oh yes it is 3 pager...

 

Boring or what!

 

SO I AM TELLING AUTHORITIES THAT THEY HAVE SHIPPED THE ACCOUNT TO 2 COLLECTORS - EVEN THOUGH ITS IN DISPUTE .. SORTA THINK THAT'S A BIG NO NO IN TRADE CIRCLES..

Edited September 12, 2009 by questioner

[citizenB]

Make a complaint to the OFT, letter in the link below can be tailored to suit your particular situation quite easily:D

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/50-complaint-in-respect-of-dca-threat-re-expired-debt/101-complaint-in-respect-of-invalid-cca-agreement

 

HTH

[questioner]

Make a complaint to the OFT, letter in the link below can be tailored to suit your particular situation quite easily:D

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/50-complaint-in-respect-of-dca-threat-re-expired-debt/101-complaint-in-respect-of-invalid-cca-agreement

 

HTH

 

 

I have already complained to OFT but will use this on others in the offing.

 

Thanks

 

CB

[questioner]

BC have never given anything but illegible terms for this account.

 

I complained to them and this is their response........

 

 

 

 

 

What really is the point is writing anything this this lot?

 

The law clearly matter not a jote to them!

[MorganaNK]

They appear to work from a script and nothing will make them veer from it!

[questioner]

So what next?

[questioner]

No agreement of any kind but good old FOS say BC are fine to persue this one ....

 

Lovely!

[dx100uk]

well they can pursue it but not through the courts.

 

bit of stale-mate!

 

trouble is....an unenforceable agreement doesn't make the debt go away, it's not some magic bullet that wipes debt out, regardless to what these reclaim co's claim.

 

dx

Edited December 18, 2009 by dx100uk
keyboard int

[questioner]

So it amounts to filing their letters of twaddle under J for junk and letting truecall tell them where to go with their phone abuse.

 

Then we have the PPI thingy to throw into the equasion.

 

ANYONE ANY INFO ABOUT "PAYMENT BREAK PLAN"?

 

One BC account apparently has come from an OC, Momument, and loads of mothly PBP are on the statements.??????

 

I gather it is a crafty form of PPI although Monument statements claim that it is NOT insurance ...

 

I may need to CCA and even SAR Monument as BC have no sign of any agreements - just daft terms forms... Yes??

[questioner]

I found this on PBR

 

Claiming against Monument Payment Break Plan - MoneySavingExpert.com Forums

 

STILL NOT SURE HOW TO PLAY THIS?

 

PBP seems to be a mystery but someone must know if we can claim it back as it was something we did not want or request.

Edited December 19, 2009 by questioner

[dx100uk]

yep its ppi in sheeps clothing

you can claim it back

 

dx

[questioner]

yep its ppi in sheeps clothing

you can claim it back

 

dx

 

Great stuff many thanks - tally hooooooooooo

 

I just need to figure out why the monument account number varies from the BC account number. I maybe should SAR Mon first ..

 

I possibly have most statements though off Mon ..

 

There have to be a link here but BC seem to have chaged the account number which is confusing me.

 

To make matter worse before it was Mon ir wa called Providian...

 

the number changed when BC got hold of it but coz I cannot get any original agreements off BC I cannot say which of our 2 accounts with BC it actually is......

Edited December 19, 2009 by questioner

[emandcole]

Barclaycard are amongst the worst when it comes to producing documentation of a certain age in our experience. To date they've farmed our old account to:

 

Mercers

Scotcall

Calder Financial

Credit Solutions

Power2Contact (Ironic that one )

 

The CCA request made over a year ago produced a modern day set of T&C's and a wierd sheet that had a load of gobbledy gook on it entitled 'change processing data'. That they maintain is enough to set the threat monkeys on us and of course all the 'we're going to kill you/abduct your granny/give you a chinese burn/stamp our feet' letters commence.

 

We'll issue a letter before action soon enough but for now we've got bigger fish to fry - the ever popular Link Financial who will get their backsides roasted if they have the gall to attend court in the new year .

[dx100uk]

you say you have the statements

then use the CC number on them.

 

you are making a reclaim for PPI dont give them the excuse of adding extra confusion

 

i paid this amount of PPI at your int rate of + 8% stat, you now owe me XXX.

 

 

 

dx

[citizenB]

you say you have the statements

then use the CC number on them.

 

you are making a reclaim for PPI dont give them the excuse of adding extra confusion

 

i paid this amount of PPI at your int rate of + 8% stat, you now owe me XXX.

 

 

 

dx

 

 

Q, I would agree with dx on this. Use the account number from the statements.

 

It would appear that dx has also cleared up the status of the payment break plan for you as well.

[questioner]

Thanks folks.

 

Claiming back PPI, no matter what they call it, is not the prime issue just yet.

 

I want to know what the old Monument number relates to today with BC.

 

Acc numbers numbers do not match and BC gave me no agreement - just an illegible terms sheet.

 

Monument was a trading name for BC and before Monument it was with Providian, which must have been a trading name for BC too.

I assume that BC changed the account number of the older account to what it is today. No modifying agreement in evidence either of course.

 

I need to get the info on this then I have proof that the old Monument account number with the PPI on relates to the current one with BC .

 

I have SAR’ed BC and this may reveal something.

 

In order to kill the new file I must know where it came from. I cannot say – oh look this account is invalid with PPI on if I cannot relate to this number discrepancy you see.

 

Hope this explains where this is at.

 

I shall wait for all SAR data before belting in the PPI claims on the Mon account.

 

Another thing is that we save all data but the other second account in dispute with BC has NO statements to show for itself. Now what if BC SAR info shows NO statements too??? I presume thay have to show me everything I ask for with the SAR thingy and at VERY least any relevent statements??? I suspect something is just not right here.........have asked the highly effective (I know I know ) FOS to look into this but...

 

Bit like un- knotting a nest of eels this...and all the help I get from BC is the usual Death, Murder, Kill if you don't, shut it and pay up without question mate - from their incredibly helpful assistants.

 

 

PS I think the reason why BC are so cagey about NOT giving out many CCA requested agreements is that they know PPI will be a BIG issue and may render the accounts invalid.

 

In some ways the easiest thing would be to say to BC - SOD OFF AND DONT WRITE AGAIN AS I WILL JUST IGNORE YOUR SILLINESS UNLESS YOU SHOW AN ENFORCABLE AGREEMENT.

 

And at the same time rattle them with the PPI CLAIM ON THE OLD monument ACC NUMBER

Edited December 20, 2009 by questioner

[citizenB]

Knitting fog is easier than trying to work out what Barclaycard are up to.

[Deb T]

It's all very well Barclaycard quoting in their letter to you

'The issue of what is an executed agreement has been interpreted in the High Court' but give no indication as to the case where the interpretation was made (I'm sure it exists but simply quoting the High Court said it so it must be so isn't good enough.

 

Also, they mentioned that you signed a contract with them. have they provided the evidence of the signature? Surely any contract to have any chance of being binding (notwithstanding the contents possibly being flawed) needs to have the sigature of both parties shown on it....

 

All standard stuff but companies like Barclaycard are fond of spewing rhetoric when writing to you but pay scant regard to their own obligations under the relevant credit acts.

[questioner]

It's all very well Barclaycard quoting in their letter to you

'The issue of what is an executed agreement has been interpreted in the High Court' but give no indication as to the case where the interpretation was made (I'm sure it exists but simply quoting the High Court said it so it must be so isn't good enough.

 

Also, they mentioned that you signed a contract with them. have they provided the evidence of the signature? Surely any contract to have any chance of being binding (notwithstanding the contents possibly being flawed) needs to have the sigature of both parties shown on it....

 

All standard stuff but companies like Barclaycard are fond of spewing rhetoric when writing to you but pay scant regard to their own obligations under the relevant credit acts.

 

 

HI DEB - NO AGREEMENT AT ALL FROM THEM - JUST THE USUAL TERMS SHEET WHICH IS HARD TO READ.

 

I HAVE GONE THOUGH ALL THIS WITH THEM AND THEIR STADARD RESPONSE IS..............

 

YOU HAVE A DEBT WITH BC, WE SHOWED YOU OUR AGREEMENT WITH YOU (I.E. ILLEGIBALE TERMS SHEET), SO SHUT UP AND PAY UP NOW OR WE SHALL GET TOUGH...

Edited December 21, 2009 by questioner

[questioner]

"Also, they mentioned that you signed a contract with them. have they provided the evidence of the signature?"

 

 

No agreement - signed or otherwise - has ever been given. I'm pretty certain that if anything nothing more than an app form would have been used. Old account too though so ...... plus the new issue of PPI misselling ..

 

Is it any wonder that getting account info off this crowd is like getting blood out of a stone.

 

Reason? They do not want us to know how much is owed - TO US

Edited December 21, 2009 by questioner

[questioner]

Paymant Break Plan info here may be something I can use

 

Any ideas?

 

[questioner]

I just found another old letter from Monument which clearly states that "we are changing our name for Providian to Monument." This was back in 03.

 

However - I still cannot understand it as the accounts now huntetd by Barclaycard have totally differant numbers.

 

BC have admitted that what they are chasing today comes from Monument too.

 

No agreements - no applicable numbers ..no historical records of what BC hunt today

[dx100uk]

i think really this boils down to you being on a phishing list.

 

you either write to BC clearly stating that you have never had an A/C numbered XXXXX with , and if they think otherwise then prove it.

 

until that time i will be ignore all communication from you and your agents as clearly you cannot prove the debt is mine.

 

dx