It's difficult to have confidence that we are right within the law after much malpractice and conditioning to the contrary. After the superb information from and stance taken by my solicitor and huge amounts of information available on many threads here, there are many success stories. So, my advice is keep your nerve and go for it. I can't see how there is any way that a Court can make an order against anyone in direct contravention of the clear aspects enshrined in law. If one did, it would be immediately overturned on appeal. See my link on the previous page to one absolutely brilliant defence. I appreciate that many people on here are lay persons and this may be the first or one of very few times that they find themselves faced with legal action or harrassment of some kind, I remember only too well the first time I decided to fight an excessive belated bill from an Insurance broker and trounced their solicitors as a litigant in person simply by reading the law / rules and sticking to them. I was accused of being a serial litigant! But it was a nerve wracking experience and many would rather avoid it, even if this means paying up when they are in the right. I'm going for them and below is the first draft of a letter finalised and issued today by my solicitor to a DCA :- Your ref : xxx 11 March 2009 Dear Sirs, Ref : my client, whose alleged account number is xxx. NEITHER I NOR MY CLIENT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY, AGENTS OR ANYONE YOU MAY REPRESENT OR PURPORT TO REPRESENT. Thank you for your undated reply further to your letter xx February in response to my formal request dated xx January 2009 in which you enclosed a piece of paper. 1. YOU are not mentioned anywhere on this piece of paper and I refer you to Section 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925, para’s 1 and 4. As my client has not received a Deed of Assignment or any formal notification whatsoever of any authority for XXXXXX to act or demand money from him, then, although Criminal Law is not my area of speciality, effectively, it appears you are attempting and have been involved in Extortion which is a criminal offence. Naturally, this will apply to individuals as well as Directors or Officers of your company and I will be looking into all possibilities. 2. The piece of paper refers to a Credit Agreement and not a Credit Card Agreement as strictly defined within the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 SI 1983/1553. Therefore it is invalid for any purpose linked to a Credit Card account. 3. In an (unlikely) alternative, there are a number of irregularities in the aforementioned ‘piece of paper’ which render it invalid for the purposes of compliance with section 78(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. a) It is not a certified true copy. b) It refers to terms and conditions which do not form part of it; I refer to section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. c) It appears to have been altered or defaced. d) My client believes that, if the original document exists, it was not signed at the time by the issuer and the individual and position of the purported signatory must be identified for substantiation. e) The ‘Right to Cancel’ details were neither sent to my client nor do they form part of the ‘piece of paper’ you supplied, contrary to section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. f) Part of it is obliterated. 3. I hereby place you on notice that, by your failure to comply with the strict deadlines, you are in breach of Section 78 (6) consumer Credit Act 1974 and by failing to do so within the statutory 30 day limit you are committing a criminal offence. As you are in default, then the following actions are demanded:- a) A full refund of all monies extorted from my client, Plus interest, 6 years @ £XX per month, total £XXX. b) A compensatory award, which I feel, is just and equitable as follows. For each month my client had to acquire funds, leave his work or other avocations, travel to a bank, execute the payment and return to work or his other avocations; I assess this at an average of X hours per event and it will be easy to substantiate. For the last six years, this would be XXX hours, claimed at the statutory allowed amount of £9.25 per hour, total £XXXXXX. c) A compensatory award for extreme stress and suffering caused by hundreds of distressing and threatening telephone calls; the contribution of these to the breakdown in his marriage, loss of family home and part access to his children. This could be considerable, but, to aid the Court, I propose the following formula. My client estimates XX – XXX telephone calls since you started pursuing him. I suggest that we quantify the compensation by looking at how these deeply disturbing calls affected him and his ex wife. If we estimate the calls were between 5 – 15 minutes, afterwards there would be a period of worry and discussion, possible argument followed by a slow recovery and settling down; for each call, the effect until the previous status quo was reached could be anywhere from 2 – 4 hours. Let us agree an average of X hours per call, @ £9.25 per hour, as previous, total £XXXX. Therefore we can then quantify the amount :- XXX calls @ £XXXX, total £XXXX. d) My costs to date for consulting with my client, researching various aspects and corresponding to you :- I will limit X hours @ £XXX total £XXXX plus VAT, (total XXXX) for immediate settlement. Please be on notice that you must pay the above (a – d, total £XXXXX Plus interest on (a)) within the next 14 days, failure to do so and the following actions will be initiated :- 1. Proceedings will be issued. Please be aware that my costs referred to above are only to date including this letter. If you do not cooperate and proceedings are commenced, it is envisaged that my costs to trial will not exceed £XXXXX and for a full hearing with Counsel, it is envisaged that my costs will not exceed £XXXXX. 2. An application to the Court for a Disclosure Order for copies of all your itemised telephone accounts for the last six years, so that all calls to my client can be accurately calculated. 3. An application for a Disclosure Order for a full copy of any records or information in your possession relating to my client. 4. A complaint will be raised with the Office of Fair Trading, Local Constabulary, Trading Standards and any other regulatory or other official body who would be interested. Yours faithfully, XX Solicitors

Sorry, take out "threaten" on previous, simply just go for the injunction if you are under or in receipt of a threat of adverse credit reporting.

Oh Mtop, re threat of adverse credit. I'm out of time as mine is past 6 years default date, but the advice I've received is if anyone threatens to apply a default notice or other adverse credit when in default after a CCA request, then threaten immediately apply for an ex parte interlocutory injunction and they will have to pay the costs. If they are in default then they have no legal basis for registering adverse history. Again, this is 'theoretical' and may need testing, but it sounds fine to me.

Hi Mtop, if you mean laymens terms re my earlier, if something is 'illegal' in the first place then there should be a right of redress. I.e, if someone is using an unlawful method of enforcing a debt, then whatever is paid is not lawful and morally / legally should be re-paid together with compensation for stress / expenses / costs caused. I'm not saying this will be easy, but as my claim will be under 5k, there is very little to lose even if, for some as yet unknown reason, it goes wrong. I've discussed this very carefully with my solicitor and we're going to go for it. If nothing else, it's a bit of fun and the DCA rogues deserve it back in Spades! We can't find anything to the contrary - unless anyone on here can suggest otherwise... (hopefully not!). It may be that others have just been happy to get their debts cancelled without wanting to risk stirring up a hornets nest or not wanting to be the first to mount a reclaim.

Sorry for delay, had to really search, found it! :- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/122431-me-mbna-abbey-mbna-10.html Page 10 - no.190

Reproduced below is part of another thread which seems to cover the possible circumstances you mention. If it is not legal to enforce something in the first place, then it naturally follows that any monies claimed or paid over are done so illegally and must be returned. I suppose it's a bit like goods or perhaps a car, bought which are already on finance, then passed down through more than one owner. They can be taken off someone 'down the line' if they have passed through more than one owner on the basis that 'good title' cannot be gleaned from bad title initially. (A stoeln painting sold years later - no provenance. I'm more than happy to find out! I guess what will happen in practice is that they will fight tooth and nail up until the door of the Court, or serious expense, then settle to avoid a Judgement. :- . ".............The message to be gleaned from sections 65, 106, 113 and 127 of the Consumer Credit Act is that where a court dismisses an application for an enforcement order under section 65 the lender is intended by Parliament to be left without recourse against the borrower in respect of the loan. That being the consequence intended by Parliament, the lender cannot assert at common law that the borrower has been unjustly enriched. This interpretation of the Consumer Credit Act accords with the approach adopted by the House in Orakpo v Manson Investments Ltd [1978] AC 95, regarding section 6 of the Moneylenders Act 1927 and, more recently, in Dimond v Lovell [2002] 1 AC 384, another case where section 127(3) precluded the making of an enforcement order. In Dimond's case the restitutionary remedy sought was payment of the hire charge for a replacement car used by Mrs Dimond. The House rejected a claim advanced on the basis of unjust enrichment. Lord Hoffmann observed that Parliament contemplated that a debtor might be enriched consequential upon non-enforcement of an agreement pursuant to the statutory provisions. It was not open to the court to say this consequence is unjust and should be reversed by a remedy at common law: [2002] 1 AC 384, 397-398. 18. Since the judgment of Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead clearly sets out that without a credit agreement the claimant's case cannot succeed

Hi Harrassed, Naturally there is huge a gulf between being 'of the opinion' and that 'opinion' being right or proven in law. Also, it depends on how that opinion is formed - if, after being subjected to threatening phone calls, abuse and duress, then, even if could be potentially argued that a payment means acceptance or admission, it would never stand up! I have made small payments for years, but this was because someone stated that they had taken over the alleged 'debt' and I must pay or else (the seven plagues would descend) etc. Now I know differently, I am going after them, all the way!

I've just posted a thread "Full Scale Attack DCA's", I'm in the process of to pursuing DCA's etc for any money extorted by them in the last 6 years. With special regard to MBNA, do you know of their long term document storage policy's? T7

I'm just in the process not only of having DCA stuff cancelled, but a brill solicitor is going to actively pursue the recovery of all payments made together with compensation for all the stress and hassle etc I've had to endure, on the basis that any money demanded without the proper authority to collect is extortion or at the least unauthorised and therefore returnable. More on this as it progresses. Now, I'm in the clear as regard defaults as my 'alleged' debts are way over 6 years 'default' period. My original so called 'agreements' go back at least 15 years so the chances of any signed originals turning up seem pretty slim. So, I'm going all the way and happy for my solicitor to issue proceedings (under 5k) to chase the rogues for a change. Thanks to all for important info on this forum which has given me the confidence to get my teeth into them! Re MBNA, have been 'dealing' with a collector for a few years, the 'collector' apparently does not collect for them anymore and has sent the file back. Although all is quiet, we are going to proactively chase them for CCA stuff and issue proceedings if necessary. Does anyone have any info on MBNA storing any 'agreements', how long, archive and destruction policy etc? T7

Thanks C, I guess it probably doesn't matter as if they don't have the original agreement document, it's non enforceable, apart from the other issues.

Hi all, great Forum! After CCA request to a DCA for an Alliance & Leicester 'alleged' account, received an old very poor, so called 'copy' (obviously from Microfiche or similar) of an 'agreement' originally issued by Chase Manhattan. I don't think it will qualify as a 'true copy' as it seems to be a copy of a copy and not of an original. Also, it refers to terms and conditions set out 'overleaf' which were not forwarded and which I understand must be included. There is a scrawl which appears on the signature section of the issuer, but I seem to recall that nothing like this was ever issued at the time. The so called signature does not even identify who purported to sign the document. There are other irregularities. Does anyone know what the relationship is between Alliance & Leicester and Chase Manhattan? Also if there is any advice on whether an old agreement, even if an original turned up, (NOT issued by A & L) could somehow be used to enforce the alleged debt? kind regards, T