Hi Tam.

 

No, we have been claiming since about October....it's been in the court system since November - court date is in june!

 

They haven't paid yet and the woman told me that she was aware we had rejected a part settlement, then went on to say that she knew nothing about the court claim goign through......I wrote back and told her that it was none of her business what we have and havn't accepted and that her statement was unecessary and thanked her for contradicting herself by randonly mentioning the rejection but then saying she didn't know wnaything about it.

 

Now, I can use her letter of suspension as a defence to their action, can't I? she hasn't acknowledged the letter, but they have acknowledged the DPA request I cleverly included in the same letter.....hehe

 

That reminds me, I need to write her a followup letter.

As long as the letter is not marked without prejudice then you can use it as evidence in court (basically) I intend using letters from Abbey in my claim against them.

What does that mean?

an example would be the banking code, which somebody refered to a page or so back

ACOP?

ACOP = Acceptable Code of Practice

Good God, that old chestnut again........and you've got me mentioning food items now!! Hussy!!!

hey corn I stand up for 2 minutes and you spread out all over the couch :o

yes I have.

I'm not on the couch cos I'm in the study.

 

cool - you do my spreadies, I'll cook dinner......still got that bottle of scotch...?well not that particular one, but another one, or any bottle of scotch, or in fact any bottle of anything at all will do, I'm not proud I'll drink anything.

spreadies and Scotch are easy you just concentrate on dinner

yippee doo! Jolly damn good Tam.

 

I'm someone's ex-wife - will you do mine for me?

Sure will Birdie but your going ot have to cook dinner

hmmm BA has Birdie been included in our discussions the last few days ? if not why not and if she has why isnt she on the couch ?

Cristal, I'm not sure how I'm going to play it now!

 

I'm tempted to sit back & do nothing:)

 

Oh yes Patricia BP likes writing to me as well - not RESPONDING to my letters, you understand, just writing her own, going on and on and on....as if I'd never got in touch with them at all.

And I'm still awaiting a promised phone call from the Customer Advocate Office....I wonder if they've forgotten, they were supposed to call me back, as confirmed by Alison in customer services on........February 4th.

For long winded letters how about one I received today in a case I started for my ex wife. It ran ot over 7 yes SEVEN pages. The last paragraph though was offering a settlement. One phone call later to correct a few discrepancies and a promise of a revised settlement offer by next week

That's when a database would come into its own (see post 6015)

 

Els

Els if we do utilise a database we must then comply with the DPA if we keep any personally identifiable information on it.

may be worth an enquiry to the ICO about in the near future.

I agree.

 

Barclays were chasing my sister for an unauthorised OD of about £470.

 

They started chasing only after we entered court papers for £1200 in charges. (8 months after she went overdrawn) After about 3 letters, they told us (in writing) that they would cease all action.

 

She got a court summons yesterday - so, I have told her to send the "get out of jail free" letter from them to them and the court as defence...........the summons came about 2 weeks after they sent the other letter.......

 

lol

This is becoming a new tactic for them. Tell us they are dropping action then go ahead with it. They must think we are stupid enough to forget it and throw the evidence away.

Have they refunded the charges yet Un1?

Thanks ladybird, that makes very enjoyable reading!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/83246-well-well-halifax-court.html

 

Els

Very nice we are going to have to keep an eye on that case

BA - this hearing sure will be interesting!!!

 

Ian - I bet you can't wait for their next letter!!! Nice for us to wrap them in circles isn't it? you "spot of bother" today made me laugh!!

We have a few interesting hearings coming up in the near future

BA your getting too good when Judges ask you to plead a claimants case do I detect a legal career in the making

I agree Emma your SAR should have produced a copy of the agreement, and in this case both forms of the agreement.

As we have found out already they only send what they consider we need when answering an SAR.

I think you will probably end up having to force the issue on this, but I suspect that if it did go before a court they will only produce the fully signed version.

BA your welcome by me to post any time you want to. your a valuable and treasured contributor.

np Redsue

BA you look after him and all the best for tomorrow, please keep me updated as you usually do

Hi BA

hope your OH is not feeling too bad at the moment - I'm watching the other CCA and Corns thread with great interest.

 

Wondered if I could pick your brains (yet again) regarding A&L/MBNA - do you know when the A&L card business was sold to MBNA?

 

A CCA request for an ongoing A&L/MBNA card I've sent them runs out on Friday (will be 12 + 30 days) and I'm drafting my letter to them now - but the strangest thing is that I've just checked my credit report online with experian and they have the credit card as 'settled' back in 2003?!? I'm just wondering if this date ties in with the changeover.

 

keep up the good fight

x

If I remember correctly the changeover happened in March 2003, but I'm happy to be corrected

Thanks for your view Professor Fate!

 

Morgan Stanley do not have a copy of the alleged Agreement, Last July I made a Request Under S78 Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a True Signed Executed Copy of the agreement, eventually after approximately 7 months I was sent a copy of a generic Credit Card mailer (credit-token) with no CC and a zero credit limit, it contained the T&C's The mailer purported to be a 2004 issue but was in fact a 2006 issue as the penalty charges shown on it had been reduced from £20 - £12!

 

I reported MS to Trading Standards for committed a legislative offence under the CCA S78...

MS cannot supply the agreement because they do not have it. Therefore they are attempting to get away with the Offence by relying on the Amendments 1983 regs., regulation 3

 

The reason that I asked for comments re reg 3 & reg 7 is that reg 7 appear to be more about the variation of an agreement by credit-tokens...and that as such be appear to be a valid argument.

 

I am interested re: Case DTI v Lloyds TSB as I have been informed by Trading Standards that there is no case law that they can go on, re CCA S78

 

I'm getting ever so confused-

 

Love AC

AC don't forget that a variation in T&C can only exists because its allowed for iun the ORIGINal agreement and ORIGINAL T&C's. hence the originals must also be sent along with the NOTICE of variation, not the new T&C. reg 7 refers to the notice of variation and doesn't say that a copy of the new T&C is sufficient.

Tam,

 

As the originator of this thread could you make it a sticky, as there is so much information on here and new posters are requesting information we discussed eons ago. it is causing a lot of old ground being gone over again and again

I'll certainl;y look into making it a sticky BA, especially the condensed form when I get around to it.

Hi Maria

 

their are some templates I'll try to find them for you.... i'm preoccupied at the moment with a bottle of wine and watching worrld cup cricket ...

 

dave

if that was the Australia/ Ireland match you were not preoccupied for long

Barclaycard still in default since October. non compliance CCA: legibility of agreement, account still in dispute sec 85.

Barclaycard stil in default since August, non- compliance etc etc and attempting to enforce through a company thats not a registered data controller except through it's parent company

Thanks Lantana...my favourite flower.

 

I believe that I will have to bring a private prosecution against MS at the end of the day! Or, just sit tight, wait for them to come to me and..then counterclaim. Prudence, or Common Sense tells me to wait, that is until I receive any notification about their next move, TS have requested that MS write to me regarding their opinion (based upon the ('notorious') rule 3 of the 1983 regs.

 

Re: The MS next move...could I ask again if anyone could post the relevant regs:- 3 & 7 of the Consumer Credit Amendments 1983 Regs (Cancellation Notices & Copies of Documents)

I cannot download them on my computer as they are all in pdf format, I need a html format.

 

On a lighter point, this week I am going to plant my organic veggies (because I probably will not be able to buy any food in the future) and a grape vine, then I can make my own wine, rather than buying cheaper supermarket chain...Value Plonk!

Failing that, I suppose, that I could venture into the forest/woods, gather nettles, elderflowers etc., and...all the while the fat cats at MS dine on Foie gras and the best clarets. All paid for by us the consumer.

 

Love AC

 

Thanks

Love AC

AC, I assume you mean SI 1983/1557 in which case here it is:

General requirements as to form and content of copy documents

3.-(1) Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act shall be a true copy thereof.

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy-

(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instru­ment or other document relating to the debtor, hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancelable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of signature by the debtor of an agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

© in the case of any copy of an unexecuted agreement delivered or sent to the debtor or hirer under section 62 of the Act, the name and address of the debtor or hirer; and

(d) in the case of any copy given to the debtor under section 77(1) of the .

Act of an executed agreement for fixed-sum credit under which a person takes any article in pawn, any description of the article taken in pawn.

and in all its glory the now famous section 7:

, Copies of agreements or security instruments where the agreement or security instrument has been varied

7.--(1) Where an agreement has been varied in accordance with section 82(1) of the Act, every copy of the executed agreement given to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act other than section 85(1) shall include either-

(a) an easily legible copy of the latest notice of variation given in accordance with section 82(1) of the Act relating to each discrete term of the agreement which has been varied; or

(b) an easily legible statement of the terms of the agreement as varied in accordance with section 82( 1) of the Act.

(2) Where a security provided in relation to a regulated agreement has been varied, every copy of the security instrument relating to it given to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act shall include either-

(a) an easily legible copy of any document varying the security; or (b) an easily legible statement of the terms of the security as varied.

I've just had a row with someone from the Halifax / BoS call centre over a Sainsburys card and she stated they are 'allowed' to call 5 times a day! When pushed she got shirty and hung up.

Sounds like they need to read the rules.

Thats almost as good as LTSB phoning me at 7pm on a Sunday and when I asked why he said it's because they work on a Sunday. This of course was the India call centre. I put him firmly in his place and hung up and blow me down he rang back within 5 minutes

There is an interesting (if minor) point that has come up on this thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collectors-debt-collection/74700-dca-turning-nasty-3.html

 

from post 41. It's about the deadlines of 12 working days plus 1 month. Does anyone know the correct interpretation?

Just to further clarify this.

The default starts at close of business on the 12th day after receipt. I say this because it's how the courts etc regard it. Plus it would also work in our favour as it shows how nice and lenient we really are

This is really very simple

The prescribed period is 12 days, after which they are in default. So the default situation starts on day 13 and 1 calender month later they commit the offence.

I say day 13 days deliberately as the courts and other official authorities allow up to close of business on that day. In essence day 1 starts when they receive the request in the mail ( usually morning) and day 12 ends at close of business, so the default starts next morning

HI

Thanks for that. I still have a problem in that i cannot see any definitions within this act that would apply to inapropriate collection methods,it all seems to be centred around work,sexual,stalking etc.

Is ther case law i can look at.

 

Many Thanks

Peter

Peter,

Somewhere in their millions of useless leaflets the OFT / FSO actual state that the continual use of phone calls may commit an offence under this act.

Their guidelines actually state one call a day is permissible although I'm inclined to think that a reasonable person would find 1 call every day a bit over the top.

Sound advice as usual from M55, but as I have paid for the CCA request And simply because I'm a scheming troublemaker I'd still chase the DCA's that failed to send the agreements

Ok I like having a bit of fun at the expense of a DCA or two