This is all the copy you need to include in any letter or response. Hope that helps. Web2dude

OK, thanks. I'm a bit slow this evening. Any idea how long it takes before going to court typically?

No, I haven't acknowledged the claim yet. I've been away for the last couple of weeks. So basically, I acknowledge the claim by sending a response to the solicitor and making a request for information. Is there a specific format I need to use? Is there any way I can get the proceedings delayed or come to an agreement post default?

This time in a legible format - link as follows: Court Form picture by web2dude - Photobucket

Sorry, with attachment!

It's the blue 'N9CPC' form. It does have a court stamp on it. I've attached the form, minus key personal info.

Hello, I have a debt with Black Horse Finance which I have recently defaulted on. I have been sent a county court claim form which they have asked me to complete. I am still unable to make payment for the outstanding unsecured loan debt of £5,885 as have other priority debts and am in mortgage arrears of approximately £9k. I also have other outstanding debt to the tune of £60k What is my best next course of action? Is it worth the Credit Company taking this to court in light of the above? Is it still too late to try to come to a pre-court settlement with Black Horse? Any thoughts appreciated! Thanks

I would wait and see what they come back with. Essentially, they legally need to comply with your request. If they don't, you can question why they didn't in a court.

Splendidly well done and I wish you the very best going forward. Subbing with interest

I had the same letter! Expect a letter from Optima Legal in about 2 weeks. Not sure what happens then.....

In the meantime by the way, I'm not responding!

I've just received the same info and letter. Looks like Optima are a debt collection litigation company. If your credit agreement is unenforceable, they will need to prove that it is in court. I guess that MBNA have sent a bulk of these out with a hope of resolving a percentage pre-legal action. Let's wait and see what happens. Has anyone else had similar letters??

I've had the same from Egg, two 'they are dealing with my request' letters so far and no response to the original claim of unenforecability. I can only suppose that they've been inundated with claims and can't cope with them. I've got a real feeling that they (and many other providers) don't know what to do with the claims as they are as clearly passing them/selling them on (illegally whilst in dispute) to debt enforcement companies with no success. It will be very interesting to see what happens next. As I can see it at the moment, most of the CrapOne, Egg and MBNA agreements appear to be unenforceable....I wouldn't be surprised if a new joint bank claim started in the high court (as with bank charges) to delay claims payout for a year or two....!

Try this: Central Trust Plc V Spurway [2005] CCLR, HHJ Overend states 24. In my judgment, the passages of Lord Nicholls’ speech cited by Mr Say persuade me that: (a)The amount of credit must mean credit in its technical sense, and (b)That although the use of the word “credit” is not prescribed, there should not be any confusion in the mind of the lay reader as to what the amount of credit

The following might help: OFT Rulings - Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 2004 sections: 9.3, 9.4, 9.5 & 9.6which further clarifies their view OFT Rulings - Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 2004 9.3 What if PPI is financed by credit? If PPI is linked to a credit agreement, and is to be financed as part of that agreement, there are effectively two credit agreements – one for the principal credit and another to finance the PPI. The credit financing the PPI will generally be a debtor-creditor-supplier (d-c-s) agreement within s12(b) CCA. If the principal credit agreement is also d-c-s within s12(b) there will be a single credit agreement for the purposes of the Act as they are in the same statutory category. If however the principal credit agreement is debtor-creditor (d-c), or d-c-s within s12(a) or ©, there will be a multiple agreement for the purposes of s18 CCA – see Q9.4. The consumer should always have the option of paying for PPI by cash, rather than credit. This applies even if the PPI is mandatory. A cash price should therefore be shown for PPI in all cases. 9.4 How should a multiple agreement with PPI be categorised? In the OFT’s view, where PPI is to be financed by credit under the principal agreement, and falls within Reg 2 (a) – see Q9.10 – there will generally be a ‘unitary multi-part’ agreement, see Q2.23. This is irrespective of whether the PPI is mandatory or optional. The same also applies in the OFT’s view to contracts of shortfall insurance falling within Reg 2 (b), see Q2.25. In other cases, the categorisation of a multiple agreement will depend upon the facts of each case – see Q2.21. 9.5 How should such agreements be documented? In the OFT’s view, a ‘unitary multi-part’ agreement should be documented as though it were a single agreement but including under each sub-heading all required information and statements applicable to the individual ‘part agreements’ – see Q2.28. Office of Fair Trading Consumer Credit (Agreements etc) Regs draft FAQs 98 Where Reg 2(9) applies, the agreements may be documented with a common heading and signature box and statements of protection and remedies – see Q9.12. In the OFT’s view, financial and related particulars and other information should be shown both separately and together – see Q2.30. It should be made clear which information applies to the agreement as a whole and which to each ‘part agreement’ – see Q2.32. Where information is common to the agreements, see Q2.29. 9.6 What does this mean for PPI? In the OFT’s view, where there is a ‘unitary multi-part’ agreement (see Q9.4) it is necessary to show financial and related particulars and other information both separately and together – see Q9.5. This means that the financial and related particulars for the PPI credit should be stated separately from those for the principal credit agreement, but should also be shown in an aggregated form – see Q2.32. The particulars would include the amount of credit and the cash price for the PPI. They would also include a description of the PPI, the timing and amounts of repayments and the total amount payable (where applicable). See also chapters 3 and 4. Separate repayment terms for the two agreements and repayment terms are prescribed terms in Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 Schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 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 Best of luck!

You don't need to do anything! Just wait for their next move:). I think this will be resolved shortly. Best of luck

If you send the letter highlighted above, you have done all you need to. State that you now consider the matter closed and that you will not be responding further to them and you consider the matter closed unless they provide the true agreement. Basically, Cap One can now only take you to court to enforce the agreement as they have not provided the relevant info. They will threaten legal action, but won't take it as it looks as though they have not executed any of the agreements properly and they don't want any test cases against them. You can try the letter below as an alternative: Your Ref: [Enter ref here] I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY Dear Sir/Madam Thank you for your letter of [enter date], the contents of which have been noted. Having taken the time to look over the documents supplied in response to my statutory request made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, I have the following concerns: On [enter CCA request date] I wrote requesting that you supply me with a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account. In response to this request I was supplied a the document which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 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 for the definition of what is required. Suffice to say none of the terms are present in the document 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. 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 In addition a full statement of this account should have been sent to me detailing all debits and credits to the account. This is my right under section 77(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The act is very clear about what that statement should include and therefore you have failed to discharge your responsibilities. What I Require Firstly, I require all correspondence in writing from here on; any persistent attempts to contact me by phone will be reported to Trading Standards. I require you to produce a compliant copy of my credit agreement to confirm I am liable to you or any organisation, which you represent for this alleged debt, if you cannot do so I require written clarification that this is the case. 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 I require you to produce a compliant statement of account showing all debits and credits, including all charges applied to this account, since the account was opened. Please note you may also consider this letter as a statutory notice under section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any data in relation to this account with immediate effect. This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies. Should you refuse to comply, you must within 21 days provide me with a detailed breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data. It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’; you must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends. Should you not respond within 14 days I expect that this means you agree to remove all such data. Yours faithfully (Print, don't sign) The easiest way of getting around this is to re-print the letter but where you will sign add '----------x----------' in the space. Then print it and sign

For info, Aegis are an outsourced chasing company based in India. They are basically employed to call you and encourage you to pay. Insist on written correspondence only. If they continue to hassle you, write MBNA a complaint letter - there is a model letter in the letter list on the forum. Best of luck

For info, I got a loan agreement back and can see that most of the required info is on there. I can see though that no mention is made of charges for the introduced business from the credit broker Ocean finance. Now I'm fairly sure that any fees paid to a third party should be shown as a separate item in the total charge for credit info. Any knowledge about this one?

Right, after some trawling, I think this is the section. Part XXVII Offences Miscellaneous offences Section 397 - Misleading statements and practices (1) This subsection applies to a person who— (a) makes a statement, promise or forecast which he knows to be misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular; (b) dishonestly conceals any material facts whether in connection with a statement, promise or forecast made by him or otherwise; or © recklessly makes (dishonestly or otherwise) a statement, promise or forecast which is misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular. (2) A person to whom subsection (1) applies is guilty of an offence if he makes the statement, promise or forecast or conceals the facts for the purpose of inducing, or is reckless as to whether it may induce, another person (whether or not the person to whom the statement, promise or forecast is made)— (a) to enter or offer to enter into, or to refrain from entering or offering to enter into, a relevant agreement; or (b) to exercise, or refrain from exercising, any rights conferred by a relevant investment. SCHEDULE 2 Regulated Activities Part I Regulated Activities The matters with respect to which provision may be made under section 22(1) in respect of activities include, in particular, those described in general terms in this Part of this Schedule. Contracts of insurance s20 - Rights under a contract of insurance, including rights under contracts falling within head C of Schedule 2 to the [1992 c. 40.] Friendly Societies Act 1992. Basically, PPI added without my permission! Any comments anyone?

Sorry, I'm not sure yet - still constructing the rest of the info. Perhaps one of the legal experts can help with this or know of the relevant section???

Looking at the agreement, I would have said it's unenforceable under the multiple agreements rule. Check out the sticky link on the home page of this forum. Basically you have two separate agreements here I think. Check out this: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/171037-multiple-agreements-falling-within.html And this:http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/105315-my-agreement-enforceable-useful.html Also, did you request PPI with the loan, or was it added without your consent? I would query this as is a defence by itself. It's up to Mint to prove that you did!! Best of luck!

Thanks, I had already picked that one up! and as far as I can see is a defence in itself under 'Ancillary products' - inappropriate incorporation of ancillary products (PPI) breaching the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. I can see four separate defences in court so far! Taking me longer than anticipated to pull the info together into a sensible argument.....!

Subbing with interest....

Sorry, missed that one. No, over the phone as far as I remember. Is this relevant? I'm just pulling together my argument info so I can send out Egg on Monday. I'll post the letter after completion as a possible model to follow...