What is the eifference between an improperly executed agreement and section 7? If they lose the agreement or say that they have how can one prove that the agreement was not properly executed? In the macGuffick case an agreement turned up at the end but they did not use it. In other cases I have seen the absence of an agrement or even if it wa simproprly executed has to be with some other point of law or misbehaviour by the bvank?

I think a word of warning is called for here, the failure of a bank to provide a properly executed agreement in of itself will not win your case, there must be something else that matters going wrong. For instance mis-selling of PPI, or or a breach in the regulations, and even then your case must be presented properly in law. It's no good going to court without a clear stretegy and hoping to win it may be doomed to failure. You must also be familiar with all the regulations such as the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and ammendments, and other codes to be able to find how to win your case. You will know if somethingb has gone wrong, likea PPI that you don't rmemebr agreeing to or other such matters.

Don't worry Middenmess, I was teasing at your expence. It did make me sit up but confirmed what I had been worrying about for some time. I had a letter from the mortgage department this morning but I don't really know if these are the required documents. So I have written back to ask if they can assure me that therse are properly executed agreements and 2. could I see the original documents. IainHL I have had one or two letter informing me that we have been late for some payments but I wrote immediatley to the higher up and asked them not to harrass us. I see one of these docuemnts is a signed mortage deed, but it seems very sketchy on detail and only ahs my son's signature with his neighbour as a witness, no other document regarding the mortgage. I have asked the bank to send a statement of all his accounts so that we know exactly how many there are and what money are oustanding. I am going to write and give them a further 40 days to present all that I need so that if it does to court they cannot then say I had been unreasonable. It is of no benefit to us to go to court and find out that they have the documents with them all along. I found a very interesting case on the net regarding lost documents and the average consumer who had been sold PPI by an agent. The agent had inflated the loan so as to make sure they had enough to cover the arrears from other loans. The agent had put the PPi onto the loan without detailing it as insurance and the judge was sure that they ahd done that to mask the fact that the PPI was an unknown addition to Mr and Mrs average consumer. The judge said in his summing up that had the documentation been deficient on the signed agreement alone he might very well have let the claim from the lenders go through. The judge was also concerned with the very high interest rates involved (28%) and legal fees added to the poor couples bill of £42 000. But even so he would have let it stand even though the agent had not properly executed the agreement according to the 1974 Act, What saved the couple was that they were obviously ignorant of the fact that insurnce ahd been added by the agent unknown by them. The judge intimated that the companies were shylock in nature and he obviously favoured theold couple of a unscrupulous agent who ahd shown that he was not adverse to doing dirty deeds, hehe. So to try and show the bank up as liars and cheats is problematic as they couch their legal jargon extremly politely for show on the paperwork, but of course if they can ambush a plaintive it is rather tempting as long as they don't upset the judge...and they know better than to do that. The judge mentioned that as the loan was specific and limited for building repairs And to pay off other loans then as it was limited to those specific purposes then it came under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The loan was secured on property. Now this is interesting because the same two conditions apply in our case. So that if I could get legal advice that the same rules applied then the mortgage deal could give them a big headache. I dare not go to a solicitor because as soon as I take legal advice the Ombudsman would not take on the case and as it is becoming obvoius that it is beyond me, it looks as if we will have to take it to the ombudsman in the end. Every sentence in the act has a meaning to a judge and solicitor and we would not even be aware of it in our presenatation and the banks are becoming very experienced now with the legislation. I am not even sure what a mortgage deed is and if the bank knew that I would be like a new virgin in the harem. Grist for their mill so to speak. Anyway, I have already started to wind down and will bash of a few letters and get ready for the ehaling balm of whiskey (with water of course) turkey and tele for the next 4 weeks or hibernate. Happy christmas to all on the site and special thanks to Middenmess, Elsa the lioness and IainHL not forgetting TexanBar and other who have been kind enough to assist. I will post that link to that summing up later in the day. God bless all...as Tiny Tim was apt to say. Ieuan

So Middenmess You suggest doing nothing in haste and enjoy the repayment holiday until they contact me? Do you envisage court action from the bank for defaults? The mortgage people have sent a letter, asking on what basis do we think they sold the mortgage in an unfair way. the only case I think we have is that they sold too many products and too many roll-over loans. i.e. He would take out a loan then 3 months later borrow money on the mortgage and use that increased borrowing to pay of the loan including the upfront PPI. It is a real mess because of the number of products they have sold him, in fact they have milked him dry. So I think Irresposnsible lending has to be our claim, the whole mess lumped together. The only problem is my lack of litigation experience, I mean it is so complicated, the law is there to help us but it is observing the legal format and niceities that are difficult, writing up coherent arguments succinctly and properly according to law. Then I have to apply the law with the evidence to prove what has happened, happened contrary to law. because HFC coughed up almost 2 grand for three letters does not mean NatWest is going to roll on their back because I send them a threatening legal letter, they will roll on the floor laughing probably. I if go to a solicitor it is going to cost me thousands of pounds because of the amount of work involved. But going to court haf-cocked will be a nightmare and if I lose I cannot then use the option of the Ombudsman. But the Ombudsman will try and patch things up and wil not play hardball with the banks, I have dealt with them before and it took 8 years to get a problem sorted out on my pension.

Thanks Elsa I was wondering if anyone has applied this legal term in a case on this forum so we could look at an example of how it wroked out?

Hello Elsa Thought you had been busy hunting for bison and elk...hehe. Yes you echo my own thoughts, ask the court to make a judgement and if the document pop out in the meantime then claim for Unfair Relationship due to miss-selling of PPI and hope to get everything cancelled in the meantime we have a repayment holiday. But while you were away Middenmess has been frightening me with case historys that failed, but I do take his point that I have to be ultra craefull in the process. 42man, I wish there was a legal definaition of restitutionary damages online, where and how it applies when claiming damages. The problem with lack of an enforcebale agreement is how much and on what basis do we claim damages for an agrement that has been lost.

Inertia, I strongly recommend taking legal advice. Alternatively go to the Ombudsman , you need help.

There is no law against selling PPI products. Try: Statutory Instrument 1999 2083: The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999; Schedule 2: Indicative and Non- Exhaustive List of Terms Which May Be regarded as Unfair (i) irrevocably binding the consumer to terms which he had no real opportunity of becoming acquainted before the conclusion of the contract. This means if they did not give you time to read the contract properly before signing it could not be fair to impose that cost on you. You should have been given at least 24 hours to read the contract or had the terms explained to you and the ramifications of default been made. The additionlal cost of PPI makes the burden of repayment even harder to bare for the consumer. This act replaces the Unfair Terms Act of 1994 which came into force on July 1995. The explanatory notes towards the end of this downloadable pdf file online, explains further that: The Regulations provide that an unfair term is one which has not been individually negotiated and which contrary to the requirments of good faith causes a significant imbalance in the parties rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer (regulation 5). If a PPI has been added to a fixed loan contract then the PPI become spart of that contract in comparison where you have an individual PPI contract and so it is much easier to apply this Unfair Terms to a contract. An Unfair Contract term is not binding on the consumer. Of course one still has to prove that it is unfair, and (i) above should be one consideration if that was the case. There is also the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and 2006. Unfair terms are geneous to the consumer and in a case where there is alleged unfairness it is for the defendent to prove otherwise. I.e. It is the bank that has to defend and prove the contrary.

Thanks for the link Middenmess, I spent an hour on it last night and posted a remark. I thought that the case had little hope of success since the debt had been paid in full. In case law where there is no properly exectuted agreement then where the debt is fully paid there is no remedy available. I think I would have grabbed the £750 and fled as it is he is lucky not to be stuck with the bank's costs. The first judge pointed out that there was no agreement and all he had to do was apply for minimal damages to win yet it is difficult to see how much more he could have claimed for over and above the £750 I know it is easy for me to speculate and he did have the guts to actually go to court but a sad reminder on how difficult these court actions can be without professional help. In my case there is still a substantial amount left on the 'alleged' debt, around £21 000. So there is a remedy available and that is to cancel this amount. Our original claims was for Unfair Relationshp due to the upfront charge of £6 000 for PPI and interest. There is no contract agreement available so the emphasis is on the bank to prove they have been fair in their dealings. Since there is no agreement it will be difficult for them to prove anything. But could we claim back PPI where there is no agreement, that is the problem. I don't doubt we could win it just remains how much we could win and how to avoid legal faux pas by forgetting to claim under the correct legislationa and ask for a remedy from the Judge.

UHm....commisserations on your loss at court, I am going through something similar myself and I can imagine your sense of frustration and despair after putting in so much effort and to lose. Middenmess sent me your details and I spent an hour reading your posts. I imagine you have not lost any money on their costs and their costs must have been around £5000.00. Did you ever get to arbitration, I did not see any notes on it or is it mediation? I did write down a few notes from their argument and it is clear that they are experts. They know the system, they scrupulously observe the niceties throughtout, paying particular attention to extra time and the system allows that. Their argument (initial) was complex and yet very logical and I am afraid of offending you in saying that they pinpointed some clever legal arguments. You should have won because they did not provide the original documentation under the Data Protections Act 1998, they pointed this our very cleverly and said in effect that if you had applied under the terms of that Act you would have won. but then they very cleverly clouded the issues and said that they could not see any purpose in such a judgement even if they had failed to comply because you could not prove any damages because of it and secondly you had not bothered to apply, so in efect it was now too late for you to apply. The first judge gave you the clue in his address to you. he made a big fuss about it to them and to you that they had no agreement. That is where you should have ammended your claim. I undertsand you are allowed to do that. I think that if you had made a one paragraph claim under the DPA you would have won, but you also had to prove there was damages and that should have been minimal in my opinion. Please don't think I am being unkind or even uncaring I am thinking solely on the legal arguments. I admire your efforts and think you are extremly brave in taking them on, so much so I don't think I have the courage to do the same thing. But I have learned so much in reading your case notes and I think you have done the site a huge service by listing everything so carefully. I am sure you would have won if only you had pleaded for a remedy such as an order undr section 7(9) DPA. I do think they went too far in suggesting to the jduge that you had no case, I feel that was very wrong because you had a case only you failed to apply for a remedy, you got caught up in the charges and the defaults. But then as the whole loan had been paid up it is case law that where there is no agreement then the case is in effect frozen. They cannot get any more money from you and you cannot claim money already paid off on the loan back, so both parties lose in one way and both parties win in some other way. i.e. the bank has had some money paid although not all and you don't have to pay the balance. In your case it didn't work out very well because you have paid off the whole loan. The bank's soliciters knew this of course, they are after all experts and they explioted their situation. If you failed to take mediation that would have gone against you and if you acted presumptiously in taking out your N1 without giving them more time that also would have gone against you. The courts prefer to drag things out for around two years and exhaust every remedy before court action. I think Middenmes is right, we do have to be extemly careul when going to court, if we foul up through lack of expereince it is to our cost. I shall now consider what action I am about to take in the light of yor unfortunate experiece and probably go down the Ombudsman route, although I could take legal advice before deciding. I wish you well in your appeal but I would take legal advice if I were you if you can afford it. regards and best wishes for the future Ieuan

Yes, the bank has confirmed that they have lost the agreements. The thing is I am entitled to ask the court to demand they provide the agreement, then if they fail, they might have 30 days, I can ask for the agreement to be declared unenforcable. And if it is unenforceable it can be stricken off and he is free of them.

I gave the bank 14 days grace on the SAR on the 14th Nov. and that time is up. I told them in my letter that if after 14 days I had not seen the executed agreement that I would take action 14 days after that without reference to the bank in the county court. Now having said I would I will have to trot along to the local county court and do just that, else they will think I am all hot air. I must say, I am nervous about it but I have discussed it with my son and we realise we are completly inexperiecned in these sort of matters but it will be for limited damages and under the £5000 threshhold and all we are asking the court to do is to demand the presentation of executable agreements under the terms of the Data Protection Act 1998. Our risk is limited to £30 and if we lsoe this is what it will cost us. So I am off to the local court to find out about procedure. Please wish me well. Ieuan

Suggest you look at the CCA 1974 140D. This section points to the Enterprise Act 2002 on how the OFT indicates how this section is to be interpreted and how it is to interact with part 8 of that Act. all these are online. These are very powerful instruments for the consumer.

I think you have won this case already but you do ahve to follow some advice to clarify it with the bank. Nothing makes the bank sit up straight more than an SAR, it takes 42 days but in the meantime you can write and state categorically that if they don't have a properly executed agreement then 'pffft' to them. Although remember all correspondence should be polite as it may have to be shown to the court. I cannot stress enough how important an SAR is, especially in your case. After they fail to provide the agrement you can write and demand they provide it or you will take court action. The court will most certainly judge their agreement as unenfoceable and then you are off the hook, in the meantime write and tell them the account is 'in dispute'. They will write and try to intimidate you and you will respond by stating that as the account is in dispute they should not harrass you as the courts take a dim view of this, and that they cannot issue a default notice or report you to a credit agency, they may not sell the debt or close your account and they may not legally try to collect the debt. In short thay can do nothing until they provide a properly exectuded agreement.

Schedule of communication with Bank and other parties relating to claims by xxxxxxxxxxxx against NatWest plc. As of 20th November 2009 Letters/documents/schedules/meetings/telephone conversations, Reference xxxx - 20th August 2009 attends bank to advise branch of problems with fraud re:xxxxxx, xxx leaves a copy of memorandumgiven to xxxxxxx on the 19th August 2009. 26th August , xxx cancels 13 direct debits at branch. (no document) 26th August 2009 Letter from NatWest branch confirming appointment with Bank Ref: xxxxxxx. 1st Sept. Letter from Cards Customer services confirming cancellation of credit card (MasterCard) Ref: xxxxxxxxxx 3rd September Letter from Mortgage Operations reference: xxxxxxxxxxxx advising that the bank are unable to assist in providing relief from interest charges on mortgage 6th Sept. Letter to bank advising of the financial situation and that a complaint is being prepared by xxxxxxxx and advising that administration of xxxx’s affair is being handed over to xxxx (xxxxx’s father) also advising of alternate address (parent’s home) 11th September Letter to branch advising of problems with debt and fraud also advising that a complain is being prepared against the bank by xxxxxx. The letter confirms verbal information given to branch on the 20th August 2009 9th. Sept. Letter to bank advising on financial situation and why card was stopped also explaining of a possible complaint 10th Sept. Letter from Customer Accounts Consultant advising that DD has been cancelled and to make alternate way of paying Re Life Insurance 11Th Sept. Letter from of Customer services advising LTA Policy is about to end 11Th Sept. Letter to NatWest Home Insurance advising of financial situation and making complaint re: xxxxxxx 14th. Sept. Letter from, Regional Manager advising that the Mortgage Protector Policy has been cancelled Re: xxxxxxxxxxxx 15th September letter from NatWest from Customer Service Associate advising that Loan Protector Insurance on the fixed loan has been cancelled and payments reduce to £218.26 from £250.00. This should be reduced by £50.00 but because fo the way payment were scheduled we are still liable for payments of £18.00 for the duration of the agreement which seems unfair. 19th Sept. Letter to bank making complaint in detail (4 pages) 19th Sept. Letter from Customer Relations Manager advising that my letter and complaint of the 16th Sept. is being looked into and enclosing guide to NatWest Complaint’s Procedure 23rd Letter from Administrator of RBS, Regulatory Concerns team advising that he is unable to progress my general complaint without further details, encloses PPI Complaint Cover sheet 25th Sept. letter from Customer Accounts advising that we have not replied to their letter and that we are in default of the agreement ref xxxxxxxxxx and demanding a payment of £29.66 (house insurance) 30th Sept. Letter from Customers Services Manager acknowledging cancellation of house Insurance 30th Sept. letter from Customer Accounts consultant with balance of the account house insurance 30th. Sept. letter from Customer Accounts Clerk with statement of the account house insurance 30th Sept. We serve an SAR re: 10 products/services with NatWest 7th Oct. Re SAR, Request from bank of regulatory Risk asking for proof of identity 7th Oct. Letter from Customer Relations Department Re: xxxxxxxxx advising compliant is being investigated 11th Sept. 13th Oct. Proof of identity sent off to Bank 13th Oct. CCA Re: xxxxxxxxxxx Credit card (MasterCard) 13th Oct. CCA Re:xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fixed Sum Loan Agreement 13th Oct. CCA Re: \mortgage a/c xxxxxxxxxxx and extra borrowing xxxxxxxxxxxx 14th Oct. Letter from bank enclosing credit card summary of statements showing no charges ref: xxxxxxxxxxxx 15th Oct. Letter to bank asking for details of Credit card statement but they have already been sent , complain that 6 years of bank statements is not enough 22 Oct. Letter from Senior Customer Advisor, Customer Management team advising that that they cannot accept Mrs.xxxxxxxxxxxxx signature for information. Surprised as mrs. xxxxxxxxx is a co-signatory to xxxx’s current account. 26th Oct. Letter from Documentation Advisory and Compliance team advising that it is not the bank’s practice to send further copies of standard documents nor further copies of statements re: Data Protection Act. But that they will send documents as under section 7 of the Act 27th Oct. Letter of Complaint re: PPI’s on xxx’s accounts and agreements with NatWest sent at RBS 27th Oct. Letter expressing surprise that signature refused and that xxxxxxxxx is still being used as correspondence address, later realise that Credit card regulations apply 30th Oct. Letter from of Customer Relations offering apology and compensation for error in calculating insurance premiums of £107.46 and giving 8 weeks to reply 2nd. Nov. CCA ‘In Dispute’ letter Re: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2nd. Nov. CCA ‘In Dispute’ letter Re: xxxxxxxxxxxxx 5th Nov. Re: SAR 2nd letter to bank reminding bank of time scale and that manual intervention documents are required and data from archive system also to iterate request that documents and parcels be sent to parent’s address. 12th November My letter with schedule of complaints to NatWest. 12th Novembers 2009 from Mint Platinum Customer Service at Southend-on-Sea enclosing copy schedule of charges (none recorded) of credit card account back to opening of account. 13th November, Letter from NatWest Credit Card Operations at Southend-on-Sea refusing data on xxxxxxxxxx as there is no account number on the request, but all account s numbers were included in the SAR of the 30th Sept 2009. This from the GGA do nothing await SAR request of 30th Sept. 13th November SAR response’ a batch of statements of current account for last 6 years (which I already have) . I suspect that all these different departments are working blind on what they are doing. NatWest needs to centralise their operations or at least merge them on one database. Included is a copy of our 1st letter to branch of the 11thSeptember asking for 6 years of statements, the letter is stamped ‘received CRSU 18th September 2009’. Cheque for £3.00 returned re: CCA requests. 14th November My letter to NatWest 3rd letter extending time for SAR for 14 days. 14th November letter received on the 20th from Customer Relations Manager recognising our complaint letter of 12 Nov. 14 Nov.xxxxx Telephone xxxxxxxxxxx and spoke at length about our compliant, happy to speak to me. 17th November Claim letter for bank charges for 6 years on current account, unable to complete claims as embarrassed without further statements going back to 1995. Warning of legal action. 17 November letter from RBS returning my documents and complaint of the 27th Oct. Received here on 20th Nov. of administration RBS informs us that our documents have been returned because the address does not conform to their records. 19th Nov.Lett. to NatWest Reg office.POA 20th Nov. letter from , Customer Services Associate of NatWest explaining that CCA (13Th Oct.) re £17K loan is not available and cannot be found. Due on 10 Nov. 10 days late. CCA’s were returned to us the data is actionable on our SAR of 30th Sept. 23rd Nov. letter from of administration RBS advising that they are taking our PPI complaint very seriously[sic] Copy of complaints procedure enclosed. Rec. 26th Nov. 23rd Nov. Letter from Senior Centre Manager NatWest. Rec. 26th Nov. Detailed response and explanation of the Charges complaint going through the courts . Very good letter and helpful! 23rd Nov. Letter from Customer Service Officer returning our POA document and letter and advising us of Banks procedure. The letter to the registered office returned. 24th Nov. letter from Documents and Advisory and Compliance Team, NatWest. Special delivery with copies of mortgage, He advises that original mortgage offer is lost. This is in response of my SAR of the 30th Sept. 25Th Nov. xxxx Telephoned Bank but refused a connection by operator as they do not recognise my POA status xxx.

If there is no agreement to be found then it seems straight forward. Apply to have the documents presented according to the data protection act. Apply for damages £90 or thereabout so it is in the small claims court and no costs are applicable. You should be able to put your case to the judge based on few lines of the Data Protection Act 1998, no judge can throw that out it is so simple. Frightening this person with £2 million legal costs is rediculous. Pointing out the ramifications of legal problems is one thing but here it is quite simple. This lady wants the agreement to examine under the terms of the Data Protection Act because she is in dispute with the bank. All she is asking is to look at the derned thing and they will not comply. The Data Protection Act allows for the court to make this decision and can order them to present it, when they fail the plaintive applies for it to be declared "improperly exectued", and therefore the loan is not recognised by the court, it is dead in the water so to speak. The whole idea of this site is to encourage people to go to the small claims court and have a go. If this person does not feel qualified she can: 1. Go to the ombudsman and ask for help (free), if she disagrees with the ombudsman she can still go to court and they will have done all the hard work for her. 2. She can take legal advice, £60 for one hour. 3. She can employ a solicitor to represent her in the small claims court 4. She can take an experiecned lay person to put her case for her 5. she can represent herself with minimal cost 6. She can ask a specialist firm of Consumer Lawyers to assist her (at a price) 7. She can negotiate (but she should be extremly careful not to agree to a bad deal) I don't know the merits of her case but without the agreement, in my opinin and the team member of this forum she has an extremly strong case. So strong she can easily put £500 down on the table for good legal advice if she is afraid for any reason. And you are right, we all have to be extremly careful of litigation. I am reading up on the OFT1107 and if I was a lender I would be terrified to lend any money to anyone so strong are the regualtions in favour of the consumer. Oft Guidance for creditors. I have one case in hand for a lender who has broken almost every rule in that book, read it and see how strong the law is. I would encourage her to visit her small claims court and speak to the clerk, they can be very helpful to the layperson. Not all judges are dragons, the one I dealt with years ago was extremly helpful, extremly so. I would encourage her to seek help on the forum and them make an informed decision. It may be better to sue under the Data Protection Act and apply for a SAR, this puts enourmous pressure on the bank and because the account is in dispute they cannot hassle you or send the heavies round. The 42 days wil do you good as you can read up on your law, take legal advice and speak to the admins on here and weigh up the risk. The banks take the SAR extremly seriously especially if you are speaking of Irresponsible Lending, also the FAS takes insurance seriously, and the PPI comes under the FSA and can taint the whole contract. Parliament and judges are now moving into an arena where tha consumer has the right, in any case of unfair realtionship, the bank has to prove it was not unfair , the consumer doesn't have to prove a thing, merely allege that the bank was unfair. I repeat the onus is on the bank to prove they were not unfair. if you want more proof I can quote the regulations to you. Don't be afraid to complain about fraud if fraud is involved, it will make them sit up. I have reported NatWest for Fraud to the ombudsman , and he will do all the work for you. If he finds in your favour you can use those results in your other claims for the documents. regards ieuan

The debt is unenforceable as long as no contract can be found. That is case law and there is precedent. Only this month someone won because there was no agrement. One of the site team said so. The judge can hardly overturn existing case law and take an entirely different route. Ieaun

cerberusalert gave excellent advice, why negotiate with them at all if the debt is unenforcable? They say you owe money, you have paid off £8000.00 so what? What does it prove? The law says the debt cannot be enforced, you cannot legally be made to pay further the bank cannot give you negative credit rating if the debt is not acknowledged by a court of law. Some peopel online don't bother with the court and are content to have an unenforcable debt agaisnt them. Others take it to court to get rid of it once and for all. As long as you don't shoot yourself in the foot by acknowledging the debt, and the bank will write letters until the cows come home hoping you will in some way enter into negotiations with you. There are threads on here that show people stopping all negotiations after a year and asking for the contract in court, when they failed they won. No negotiation, not payments back to them - finished. You will never be is such a strong position, be very careful what you write to the bank and very careful on each and every action. regards ieuan

Thanks Middenmess, nice to hear from you again. I looked that site up and it is very complicated, and I will have to use a solicitor. I am concerned that I have to give them so much private details and then they might turn the case down. I am planning to go to the court this week, but as soon as I do that I lose my right to use the ombudsman, and that worries me. regards Ieuan

Hello Mabes I am the other 'lost case' NatWest lost my son's agreement and mortgage agreements. I believe this is carelessness on their part but it could also be a delibrate atatempt to avoid court action that they might lose under irresponsible lending. The consumer laws are now so strong that they fear court action. In my case since they admitted they have lost the agreements in writing to me. I have stopped all payments. To get the repayment reinstated they will have to go to court, I am going to court in a week to demand the agreemnets and if they don't turn up with them shall ask that the judge make them unenforcable, that means they cannot report you to credit agencies or demand payment. In my opinion. In law where there is breach of contract, in this case there is no contract it is normal that one cannot get the money back that you paid in repayments for an alleged loan, but niether can they press for payment for a loan that was not properly executed. If they cannot produce the loan agreement duly signed by you and by the bank then it may not exist and if it does not exisit is not properly executed. In short the balances are frozen for both parties. In your case this is a benefit as you don't have to pay any money to them any more, and in their case they can't get any more from you. Hence their offer, if they can get you to sign an agreement to pay of their 'alleged debt' they get something and so do you (i.e. you save the interest). Whereas if you go to court you will win, unless they are hiding the agreement up their sleeve, for what purpose I do not know. But it cannot be held against you if you stop payments as long as they have admitted there is no agreement to be found. Why don't you go to your local court, they are often very helpful and ask them how to proceed in demanding the credit agreement. I will be doing that this week. regards Ieaun

I read a book on 'A' level law this weekend, it is most difficult. I can't see how I have the skills to take this to court. There is so much money involved that the bank is bound to tie me up in legal knots and /or move it to the high court where I cannot possibly have th emoney to continue my action. I recieved a long letter from a Customer Service Manager and the bank does seem to be addressing some of the issues regardig data. They are making noises about providing data for longer than the 6 years. Joyce E. Tudor's name comes up whenever statements are asked for, I supose she is the queen of all their statements. What I can't undertand is how they send letters saying they are following OFT guidlines in fallowing the 6 year rule and then agree to send the statement when you go higher up the chain. NatWest are making a meal of this and abusing proceedure ruels in my opinion. The complaint proceedure is a way of identifying spurious claims from the bank's point of view and filltering them out without admitting anything. Why did HFC cough up after 3 letters and NatWest is still rattling off negative letters 4 months later? IainHL, I checked up on the FSA website and they do take the Unfair Terms legislation very seriously and state that claims going back to 1995 are under the Unfair Terms. I think I have a way of challenging on the mortgage because of the unfair terms, they sold my son PPI and life assurance with the mortgage. I think they abused their status in suggesting these products because he had no chance to negotiate and they used undue influence in other words buy these products they are good for you and you have a better chance of getting a mortgage. They also sold him on Advatgae Gold at the same time. He did not need life assurance , he has no one to worry about and he certainly did not need PPI. In any event they cannot find the mortgage agreements.

I see, thank you. No, compound interest does not apply to this account, he paid up imediatley so there was no compounding of interest.

C.I.Rate?

The reason I ask about restitutionary damages is because this site is now advocating we apply for it. The idea of restitutionary damages is that if the banks made a profit for the past 6 years then my son's money has been used to generate those profits. I don't have to prove that, it is a fact as long as his claim is right, i.e.they cannot take his money from his account without having a properly executed agreement, as they don't have one then he have a just claim. So they have used money from my son's account and made a profit therefore he is entitled to ask for restitutionary damages. My question is : 1. has anyone on the site successfully claimed restitutionary damages? 2. if so how did they apporach the problem? 3. how to fill in form N1 to include it? 4. how to claim for more than 6 years? ieuan p.s. Gezwee, the pre-ticked option on PPI may have stopped but this agreement goes back 7 years.

The way I work out interest is to use works. Make four columns if it is just charges make 6 if it includes their interest, use headings like this: date - charge - months - constant - stat Int at 8% - Int Chrged - Stat Int The constant is 8%/12 (0.08/12) so over 84 months the first line will read: date - £8.90 - 84 - Constant - £4.984 - 0 - 0 second line will read: date - £4.32 - 83 - constant - £2.3904 - £6.00 - £3.32 and so on if they make a partial payment it will have been recently, so take the amount to leave a balance and start a line to refelct this.