They are very polite indeed, I have had a couple of dealings with them however, they don't lways get theeir paperwork right which meant that they had to write off over £2.5K from me Mike

There you go, I dont see how on earth they do calculate it, but with my wifes statements the problems go back to the £13 overcharge in October 2002. Mike

That letter is just a standard letter I've had one exactly the same, as I said before you have been supplied with acopy of the 'agreement' with Providian, not Monument. As someone else has said before on another thread the replies are a reflection of the standard of training and education that is afforded the people who work in customer relations. They probably have no idea what we as consumers are talking about when it comes to the law, and really they should transfer it up to the lehgal department, but of course if they do that they would lose the potential of getting commission. Notwithstanding the above in the long run it will actually cost the banks more in time and court costs. As the old proverb says (misquoted here) Mounument know the cost of everything but the value of nothing. Mike

Podiatrists have to be state regsistered and are governed by the Health Professions Council, make a complaint to them regarding the practioners actions

It's Brian!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The thing is with Next is it's not just the late payment charges its the amount of interest they charge. On the back of each statement theere is a very clear indication of how the interest is calculated as a maximum of e.g. (say) 2.014% on the opening balance of your stament. Clear & concise, however, get your calculator out, how many times do you get charged more than what they say? One month my wife got overcharged £13, others £1, others pence but compound that over the months it adds up to a tidy sum. Wrote a letter on her behalf to their customer services, only to be fobbed off and given a £10 'good will' gesture. Haven't had much time to deal with this matter yet, but it's on the back burner, together with a latter of complaint to TS and FOA Mike

It looks like I may be going down the same road as you, I've just had a letter staing that if I don't pay off the arrears, (all added when they were in default of a section 78), by April 9th, I'm sure that you are reding this Monument. They will issue a default notice if I don't pay them, by then. Oh dear Monument defamation under the Data Protection Act 1998 as well as trying to enforce an unexecuted agreement. What is the world coming to. Needless to say that I will be claiming compensation from the court and charging you if the 'phone calls start again £50 for each at home and £100 for each at work. Mike (I bet you can work out who this is by now!)

Spot on seahorse

I would write to them in the first instance, PM me & I'll give you a copy of the letter that I wrote.

It most certainly does my friend

The terms and conditions that the have sent you are for Monument Bank, your application is stamped by Providian therefore they have not complied as dx100uk implies with sending you the founding terms and conditions. I'm sorry dx, this 'reply card' does not comply with what is required under the act, so it is not an executed agreement. Mike

If you google it there is a site that gives you all the infor that you need

Yep it is worth checking your credit file, its surprising what that leads to. Mike

Nowt strange there believe me Mike

In addition don't forget if this is a debt under the consumer credit act the granting of a bankrupcy order is not automatice since a 'time order' is the first port of call. Nevertheless if this organisn does issue you with a stat demand, you have 18 days to get it revoked. Google stat demand and arm yourself with the wealth of information on the web. The important thing to remeber is that wrongfully issuing a stat demand is just as dangerous to the filer. Mike

Totally agree and thank you for your kind thoughts and posts, but there is more to come, this has not stopped yet. Mike

Isn't this exactly what the site was established to do, these are penalties nothing more and unlawful under the Unfair Terms & Conditions in Contracts Act. I know its easy for me to say and I can empathise with your position, since I've been there myself a few years ago and had to sell my house to get these b*******s of my back. I now know that didn't have to be the case, but it didn't stop them allowing me to do it! Have you asked for you original agreemnet by the way? Penalties again! Another thing if you have gone to the CCCS, they know that if they took you to court to recover the debt, that's all the court would offer as a monthly payment. It's more productive in their warped minds to chase you over the 'phone for it because they think (that's an odd word when you talk about these organisms) they can wear u down. In addition by not complying with or dealing with the work of third parties they are in contradiction of the OFTs guidlines on debt collection It is an extra pressure, however it is your bank account and they have no lawful right to take money from it without court intervention. Right to them and ell them that you will consider any removal of maoney from your account to be theft under the The Theft Act 1964, I can't remeber the section, sorry. Copy it to your bank, and tell them that you expect them to honour your instructions under the direct debit gurantee scheme. Do NOT file for bankrupcy unless you really need to, this pressure is becoming intolerable for you I can see but try to be strong, they are clearly on their back foot here this is why they are pressuring you so muc. Continue paying these organisms the token £1 per month until the CCA comes, if it is out of order then stop paying, end of! Tales like this make my blood boil, this girl is trying her best to get herself back on her feet and all these unlawful amoeba do is circle like vultures let her file for bankrupcy, get thier 1p in the £1 (if that) from the administrator and move on to the next poor sod. Mrs Wonder which DCA(s) and bank(s) are you dealing with post it on here to see if the other members will help, I certainly will if I can and give you letters to write to send of as well. MIB you started this thread, this story is the ramification of you and/or your colleagues in the finacial industry, you have to comply with the law, but you ignore it when you choose to. You ignore the OFTs guidlines, and TS, why because you know that very few if any will take action against you. I've got to sign off now to calm down. Mike

Sorry Term and Zubo it is indeed signed by RBS, just below the RBS Advanta stamp there is a signature partially obscurring the small print, that really is enough, the 1983 regs, do not stae where the signature should be but that it should be outside the customer's signature box.

It may be splitting hairs, but the law is straight down the line, no variation at all. You say that the RBS merely rubber stamped your application, by inference there is no signature. Well I'm afraid that does not conform to what is required under the act. Both the 1974 act and the 1983 statutory instruments state that to be truly executed it must be signed by both parts, the only variation of the use of a signature is the company seal. I know that we can all discuss what a signature is, well it is pretty succicnt under law, however, by extension the stamp may be a facsimile of a signature, but if it (in this case) merely says 'RBS' and the date thats not good enough. Mike

I can't quite make out the small print in the bottom right hand corner, does it contain the APR or refer to a point in the T & Cs? If so then it would probably be an executed agreement. However, if the referred point is a small chart listing a number of different rates, depending upon your credit score this does not comply with what is required. I cannot see a credit limit or a reference to it, provided there is a reference to it in the T & Cs this may be acceptable. Remeber when it comes to the Credit Limit, they don't have to give and exact figure, they can just insert a statement along the lines of 'you will be notified of your credit limit'. I know that this is rather paradoxical when you consider how the APR has to be an exect figure. I know one or two have said that it is just an application form, but the format of these are covered by the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 Mike

Just going to it now. Mike

As an extention of the input from Professor Fate and the replies therto. If this person is MIB it does matter because this thread is there to argue around the CCA & give advice to those who are sticking their toe in the water. The mention of Stautory Demand and the 'B' word is enough to put aload of people off, who wouldn't be, if they are just starting to establish their rights. For those who may have been affected by this persons input, please please Google 'stautory demand', the information that you gain by that cursory inquiry and the instructions that you gain should be nough to put your mind at rest. Remeber a Stat demand is just as dangerous to the filer as it is to the defendant if the former hasn't got all his facts right. As for clicky, to some extent this thread is, its IS very exclusive because the arguments have developed and are at times very technical, unless you take the time to read over 200 pages. However, that doesn't make it any the more less informative. As reagrds PF, he obviously has a IP address it may be interesting to see how that compares with the other 'commando raids on our gang'. Kind regards, Mike

No Professor Fate tonight, interesting.

This is a dramatic turn in the tactics used by the MIB, however, also a very foolhardy one since it is easily set aside if they have not complied with a stautory requirment or established court direction. It seems very much like hot air, and just a tool to re-establish dialogue between you and your creditor. Where are u based PF, seems a little late in the day to find out about this site? Forgive my inquisitivness but the MIB have tried to manipulate threads before, and the timing of this enquiry at this stage of the thread seems odd. Mike

From a personal point of view, if you have a debt then you should honour it. However, if the MIB have applied interest & charges unlawfully because they haven't conformed with the law as it stands then that is tough on them. Thats the money that I am going after nothing more, I'm just asking them to be law abiding citizens. I may be professional in my outlook upon debt its a shame it isnt reciprocated, I've got a letter in front of me from customer realtions at Monument it states in answer to a letter that I sent last Saturday, "It is Monument's policy to contact customers in the event that a payment has not been made to the account. As this is an opportunity for the customer to discuss any financial difficulties that they may be experiencing, it does not constitute harassment. However, I will have your telephone numbers removed from our records and therefore we will contact you by letter in the event that a payment is not made to your account". And this is an account that was founded upon and 'agreement' that does not in any way conform to the CCA 1974. In addition, how would my circumstances alter between 10am and 6pm on the same day when all they are doing is contacting me to "discuss any finacial difficulties". No I'm sorry some of the MIB ride roughshod over the individual using intimidation and threats when they have no right to do so. They ignore Trading Standards, the Office of Fair Trading and the Law just to make sure that Mrs Smith pays off that £25 she has outstanding with Tittlewoods. No sir, perhaps if the MIB behaved professionally and treated everyone with respect then I could offer some assemblance of respect for them. However, because they have treated me so badly, and in every single case it's because they themselves have not complied with what is required, I have no compunction in treating them as badly as they have treated me. Mike