Thanx so much - feel v reassured and will invite them 2 take me to court - ie put up or shut up. I don't think they will: they wouldn't want to have to explain in a public court just how incompetent they've been in so, so many ways... It amazes me how people who earn so much can simply substitute harassing for doing their job right! But I guess we all feel like that on this site. Thx again all, best, Linda

Hi - yes, if not dated at all it renders the 2007 thing a bit meaningless... Anyway Cerberus - have been wading thru my lengthy correspondence and can't find default notice on this account at all. (Nor the other credit card - but have got default notice on overdraft. I've put in SAR request a couple of weeks ago so will be interested to see if they sent Default Notice at all.) Re this particular one tho with the undated and unsigned (by them) agreement, I see from Experian that it was actually defaulted in Feb 06. It was opened in 03 (when I was at the address on the agreement). So it was opened deffo before the 07 divide. What is the significance as far as you're concerned? Let me know how you'd play it. I have to admit I am confused by this 'unenforceable' - full stop - and 'enforceable only by a court order' sort of thing. Is it one or the other depending on whether it was taken out before or after 07? Best, Linda (PS I do appreciate this help and will donate 2mos when have some funds in bank!!!)

Hi and thanks. Good news that B3rty cos they don't want to go to court because they've been mega-incompetent plus have bullied me mercilessly though have sent them much medico evidence why they shouldn't... And yes, Cerberusalert, they defaulted me three or four years ago when I got seriously ill and got a DMP with CCCS. As I'd have been 150 years old by time I paid it off I tried a year ago to make a full and final. They didn't even reply... But then I found this amazing site and CCA requested them: for one of their cards there's no agreement at all, for the other there's just this undated and unsigned (by them) one. For the overdraft neither of the required letters. They've defaulted all three accounts and set a range of DCAs on me. Any thoughts/fighting tips? Is it wrong to have defaulted me? Can I get em for that? Thanks, Linda

hi all, thanx for merging threads, cerberusalert - I hadn't realised reallymadwoman had answered, sorry.. anyway, the prescribed terms are there (ie amount, apr, repayment etc cos all on a standard sheet) it is just that there is no signature from the bank and it isn't dated at all. It is a photocopy but - if we went to court - the same thing would be revealed: the bank didn't sign n date it. Frankly he was so busy chatting he didn't finish the paperwork right... So where do u think I really stand now? Thanks, Linda

Hi there thanks for getting back to me. No the address was correct at the time - it's just that I moved so isn't my address now. But there's no date on the document at all - does that mean it's invalid per se as a legal document? (After all isn't dating it meant to preclude those types of muddles with addresses being different now?) Also it wasn't signed by the bank - just a clerk's initials but no proper signature and the day of the agreement box left blank. Surely a kegal document should be dated? Best,Linda

Hi - input appreciated! Have been sent a CCA that wasn't dated - does not dating a legal document render it invalid? Also the bank didn't sign it. And it has my old address. But is the not dating it so first base that the rest doesn't matter much anyway? Thanks, Linda

Hi - in response to a formal request I was sent a copy of an agreement for a credit card. The financial particulars are there BUT it has not been signed or dated by the bank. The 1974 Act says unless it's signed by or on behalf of the creditor then it's improperly executed. What is in the 'signed on behalf of --- Bank' is blank - except there is what looks like a clerk or sec's initial - certainly not the bank manager's signature who did the agreement (I knew his signature and it wasn't girlish initials.) Also the 'This is the date of the agreement' is blank. I can't see owt in the Act act about dating it - it just says 'signed in the prescribed manner' - can I assume that when you sign something for it to be valid it must be dated - it's so first base. Is a document valid at all if it's not dated? Also the addy is wrong - I moved 7 years ago and that's the old one. (I was paying till last year then tried to do a full and final but they didn't respond but have harassed me mercilessly when v ill so am buggered if I'm gonna pay now after what they've put me thru... Any thoughts on them signing, dating and what is now an incorrect addy? And wd it be unenforceable at all - or by order of a court? Thanks! L

Also to add - BLS Collections for Lloyds TSB: daily and twice daily phone calls from muppets who didn't have a clue about the accounts, kept me hanging on by switching on music even when I was talking etc etc - even when I told them to read the correspondence because I'd paid a full and final and they were in breach of my request for true copies of CCAs and I'm chronically sick, don't want phone calls and respond quickly to correspondence. I told his boss he was vicariously liable for the harassment!

Thanks for that support, angel 1 - and the truecall thing is a good tip! Yes, I get DLA etc - not enough to go around all the creditors alas... This site has been amazing though and I hope other vulnerable people find out about it and get to know the help that is at hand - I've heard of too many who have been bankrupted and made thoroughly miserable because they didn't know what recourses were available. Just reading other's tips and the help I've had personally so far is turning my life around. Thank god for the power of the internet and the kindness of strangers... Best, Linda

Thank you so much! That is fantastic!!!! Banks - here I come: I've got a determination and now I know how to use it!! Great cds, best Linda

Hi there, any comments or help with thinking about this situation - which any of us could face (and I did). In 03/04 I became really ill with a physical condition and couldn't earn but thought I'd get better. Also was a bit nuts with pain so not thinking straight and not really economising from good standard of living I had before. I was not thinking about budgeting but was trying to keep the family going (I'm a single mum) and also paying for treatments to get me well. Also my ex chose that time to cut his payments. Cue credit cards and overdraft suppliers who lent me - I can see now in the cool light of day - reckless amounts and all very counter to OFT guidelines. Anyway I didn't get better and am now registered disabled and incurably sick and do work a bit but often can't and anyway there's not much work out there (I'm an ex-journo). But I have also been diagnosed with depression - much of it caused by debt - there's a surprise! I think that this kind of modifying life event should be taken into account. The banks don't. They think they should take my house! I've looked at the OFT guidelines on lending and it is clear that none of them followed it to see if the lending was of any benefit to me - rather than to them accruing interest payments. I have two overdrafts - one of which I'm fighting about actively (harassment and other counter claims) the other I daresay I will have to when they wake up. None of the card people bar Mint have been able to show a credit agreement thus far. But even this I can see from looking at that agreement that they've not asked me proper questions: ie on that money and with those two cards already what is your mortgage and how many dependents do you have? They've only looked at what limit I could legally go up to to get what they can - no thought of the benefit to me. Any thoughts, anyone, on a case to make that it would be better for them to settle with tiny full and finals from a Disability Living Allowance backpayment than have the courts look at the effect of reckless lending has had on my health. I can say that stress made me more ill of course. But is there any legislation or codes or guidelines etc to help. Mint has offered a fiver a month for the next million years but I want to get free of them as they do just suddenly sell to ghasly DCAs that then want your home and everything and it's just a stressor that doesn't help my health. I want tobe free - not just hope they'll be 'sympathetic'. Personally I think they play a high risk game with high returns - if some people fall by the wayside through no fault of their own, I reckon they should wipe their mouths - they don't, they strip the body! So if anyone knows of quotable legislation, codes and guides or ideas so that I can finish them up rather than play for time - please let me know! Best, Linda

Hi cds and Cerbusalert - thanks so much for that! Very interesting. What is the act you have quoted there, cds? - so that I can credit it properly and make it look as if I know what I'm talking about! Then I'll ask them for the letter and post it up - it won't come of course. Does the letter needed apply to overdrafts taken out late nineties? Also - sorry to be a bit thick or slow on the legal uptake but I'm not quite clear on what your last comment means exactly though it sounds just what i need potentially - ie what is part V exemption etc and where did the determination come from... What does it mean exactly in non legal English? Can you just join that up so I'm clear what I'm talking about please? As for the DTI review that Cerbusalert posted: would all that only apply to overdrafts taken out before 2006? Mine were taken out before and I went on a debt management plan with CCCS mid-06 - so they were still ongoing in 06 but originally 'agreed' a few years prior. Does that cut them out othe 2006 regs? Thanks so much! Linda

Thanks for that, Babygirl - that is very interesting because why should one type of credit agreement need an agreement but not another. The creditor could still do one to safeguard themselves, regardless of whether it's covered by the Act or not. If I were lending someone thousands I'd do an agreement - not just rely on statements or their equivalents. I have written to Halifax because - as you can imagine - there was already a long list of harassment etc etc. and have made an offer. But this is more ammo. Also I have another overdraft... If Steven4064 and Rory32 are out there - any thoughts? Or from anyone esle? Best, Linda

Thanks, Ripped and Cerbusalert - at least that clarifies that! No - it wasn't charges alas... Now to write to them with my backtrack and f&f offer... Linda

Hi - can anyone clarify this for me please? I made a formal request + £1 thing to Halifax for an agreement on an overdraft, which they said they'd send. I had thought overdrafts should have an agreement because Steven4064 in his very helpful piece on the enforceability of agreements puts overdrafts in the same category as credit card agreements as running account credit - as follows: '3. Financial Information (Schedule 1) The financial information that must be present for the agreement to be properly executed depends on the type of agreement. i) loans for particular purchase (fixed-sum, debtor-creditor-supplier agreements) - a description of the goods or services, the cash price and the amount of credit ii) advances - the amount of credit iii) running account credit (overdrafts, credit cards) - the credit limit...' I'd also read on the site (and I think but am not sure it was posted by Rory32 who's very knowledgeable) that overdrafts do require an agreement -but they don't need to have the debtor's signature on them. (I surely wouldn't have imagined it...) So - I assumed the same rules applied and you could CCA them and - if not produced - then not enforceable. However, Halifax today said I was mistaken and ss 77 and 78 don't apply to overdrafts and current accounts with overdrafts are covered under section 74. The letter says: 'Section 74 (1) (b) of the CCA '74 provides the the procedures under the Act for the execution and signing of a credit agreement do not apply to an overdraft on a current account. It follows that being exempt from the requirements in part V of the Act that there will be no documented agreement and section 77/78 does not apply.' Is that true? Can anyone clarify what the true score is with overdrafts? Linda