I am in dispute with my water supplier. Briefly, when they installed a water meter they caused a leak which remained undetected for a year. It has caused major structural damage to my property. My insurance company are dealing with a claim against them for this. However, part of the damage caused was to a concrete lined pond, which now leaks to the extent that I'm having to put in a couple of cubic meters of water each week. Until my claim against them is finalised (which could take a year or more) this is an ongoing situation because the liability for repair rests with them. They have issued me a) with a bill which includes the amount of water leaked and b) with a subsequent bill which includes the water I'm currently using to refill the pond. I'm refusing to pay and I've told them why (by phone, by letter, by solicitor's letter). However, they keep sending statements and today sent a demand which included a threat to register a default with the Credit Reference Agencies. It is my understanding that OFT guidelines preclude this - as there is a dispute - and I've told them this. However, I don't know if there is any law which prevents them doing so. Does anyone know?

It's been some time now - I've had no further chasing from any of the Lloyds lapdogs, so I imagine they've given up.

I understand the title alteration . Why Companies House? It could equally likely be 'lost'. I want to write directly to the supposed issuer and ask for confirmation that such a letter had been sent and ask him to provide a copy. Then I'd see if the 2 copies match - which is pretty unlikely. I could go via their compliance department but that might trigger suspicions. I'd rather not at present - I'd have to black out too much for it to be worthwhile. Once I've got some sort of response from Lloyds I'll be happy to.

I've just started a thread under Lloyds in the bank area because I've also had one of these fake letters from Cabot. In my case it's supposed to be from Lloyds TSB.I don't want to hijack this thread but I am very interested in the legal ramifications of Cabot forging such letters.I think it's something like 'issuing a fraudulent instrument' because they are claiming that it's a notice of assignment. The thread I started is http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?306852-Lloyds-TSB-suspected-fraudulent-letter-from-DCA (I hope that works!)

Briefly, I've been fighting Lloyds TSb over a credit card claim for about 4 years. In that time I've been through about 6 DCAs. The latest in this line is Cabot. They, after pushing, sent me a copy of a supposed 'notice of assignment' from Lloyds to Cabot which they say is a copy of a letter Lloyds sent to me. However, it's obviously fake - you can see the lines round the logo where they've cut it out and applied it to the letter! It also has no address on it. It's 'signed' by Craig Ballantine - who is now the head of the department that sells on bad debts. (I found that out via LinkedIn where his details are:Manager, Late Recoveries & Debt Sale at Lloyds Banking Group, Kirkcaldy, United Kingdom ). I think this raises a number of issues. Obviously, there's one of Cabot issuing a suspicious instrument in attempting to obtain money. However, in order to prove that I need to contact Craig Ballantine and ask if such a letter was ever generated and for Lloyds to send me a copy. The problem is - I don't have an actual address for the department within Lloyds. Does anyone? The other issue is that, if I get the proof, who do I take it to? Would it be a police thing? FSA? OFT?

Whereas I. OTOH, would be delighted to defend myself. Trouble is that my creditors won't sue me - probably because they know they don't have the requisite legal documentation. So, they'll keep referring to collection agencies - and I'll keep telling the agencies that if they pursue me I'll add their names to a formal complaint to the Ombudsman. As that may affect their ability to keep their license they seem reluctant to bother me after that.

Have a look at this http://www.petinsurancecompare.co.uk It's a site that was set up by pet owners to let people compare the best pet insurance policies. It shows what the policy benefits are and doesn't quote premiums as they can vary so much depending on the breed/age/type of animal and whereabouts in the country you live. Hope that helps.

Sorry to disagree but you are 100% wrong. In my 35 years of working with various banks I have NEVER heard of any of them destroying legal agreements. Their whole business is built on agreements. I do, OTOH, know of some pretty vast storage places where boxes and boxes of such agreements are kept. However, the fact is that many of the agreements, e.g. credit card applications, aren't 'agreements' at all. Therefore the banks won't disclose a photocopy of them because they know that any self respecting brief could drive a coach and horses through. But, you'd better believe that that they can find them, because they can. It is also the case that they have copied much of their paperwork and committed it to computer record. Things like bank statements etc were being committed to microfiche and mag tape 25 years ago - but the information on them will exist. If a bank says it can't find the original of a legal document - it's lying (or it's been miss filed - which rarely happens). If it says it can't find an original bank statement that may well be true - but it will be able to reproduce the information contained on it. But that's a whole different thing. All banks have legal departments. Those departments employ professional solicitors. There isn't a prayer that they would EVER let an agreement get destroyed.

But the fact would remain that if anyone wanted to enforce a contract they'd have to bring proof that such a contract existed. And that proof, in the case of these agreements, would have to be the original signed copy of the contract - I wouldn't have thought that a court would even accept a photocopy. The banks claim that they only have to provide the wording of the agreement to provide a true copy - and it would appear that they may well be correct. But they won't rely on that if it comes to court because they need to prove a contract exists between them and you. The reason they won't show you a copy of a signed document is that they know the document isn't a valid contract. And, irrespective of new types of storage, the banks will ALWAYS keep the original documents in the case of a legal agreement. They have warehouses (well-protected) full of such paperwork. One bank actually sent me a copy of my signed 'agreement' and, in the accompanying letter, said it referred to the 1974 Act. It didn't. Anywhere. I've invited them to sue me time and time again. They should have a cast iron case. But they know they don't have a valid signed contract - so they just keep on and on plugging the next debt collectors in.

I had a similar experience so - I wrote to each successive 'debt collector' explaining that I had written to the original debtor (and the subsequent DCAs, which I listed) disputing the debt and that, as court action had been threatened I had requested certain documents from them. These had not been forthcoming. Therefore, I required proof, in writing, from the DCA that they had now assumed the debt and if so, that they were now in a position to release to me the documents I required. Further, if they did not reply within 14 days I would add their name to a complaint I would be making to the Ombudsman and I would cite not only the DCA company but all individual directors thereof plus the person named on the letter they had just sent me. I also asked them to supply a written copy of their formal complaints procedure as required by the FSA. I included the normal paragraph about doorstep collectors being trespassers, uninvited etc. and added that should anyone attend the premises that the DCA would agree to pay a fee of £250 for inconvenience caused by such a call. If a call was made by either one of their employees or an agent acting on their behalf that would be deemed acceptance of the charge. I sent it recorded delivery. Amazingly enough they dropped out. I have the feeling that I've now exhausted all the debt collectors. But, if I haven't, I'm prepared to carry on.

As they said in their letter that they are prepared to let a judge decide I would have thought that was sufficient evidence, should it come to court, that legal action was being considered. Therefore, in order to save the court's time etc. you should send them a disclosure request specifying exactly what documents you require but as part of that request stating that you already hold a copy of an application form and a copy of BC's Ts&Cs but specifically want a copy of a signed credit agreement. They, quite clearly, can only produce the application form and Ts&Cs. Once you've had their reply proceed to court, as you have done pretty much everything humanly possible. However, I'm not sure whether you should do this to 1st Credit or Barclaycard. I'd like to see 1st Credit stuffed but they are only one of the outfits BC uses. I got my paperwork from BC - although, bizarrely, I didn't ask them for it (I got it by threatening the latest DCA with joining them to a complaint against BC with the Ombudsman.)

I find your letter confusing. If you are trying to use it to get them to provide a 'signed copy' then I can't see where you are asking for it. What you've said is. in effect, "this letter puts you on notice I'm going to court so please send me a letter". To what purpose? I think you need to add in a demand that they send you the a copy of the correctly executed agreement or that you'll ask the court to make them produce it. The other thing that bothers me is that you've said things there that could be useful to them - like the court has powers to make the agreement valid in certain circumstances. Do you really want to tell them that? It's up to them to discover that sort of thing (and you don't want to remind them).

Another useful ploy is to ask them - before you answer any questions, even saying who you are - for a 'security code'. If they can't provide it, which they can't as it doesn't exist, tell them you can't talk to them without them telling you what it is. If they try and ask you something again just repeat "Please tell me the security code". You can drive them nuts doing this. It's only a small thing but it does make me think I'm striking back in a small way.

I'm sure this has been addressed elsewhere but if I get such a phone call I ask THEM for their name, date of birth, etc. so that I can have a record of whom I'm talking to in case of future legal action. I get one of 2 results - a) they hang up or b) they bluster in which case I say that without them passing the security check I can't talk to them - and I hang up

Things may have changed but it used to be the case that when you (a company) registered you would say what uses the data could be put to. That could include passing it to anyone, storing it anywhere, etc. You (the company) didn't have to inform the data providers of any of this. So, unless things have changed since DP started, yes, they can pass it on - provided they registered to do so.