Awesome - that's just what I was looking for. You rock. Thanks m8. I feel confident enough to take 'em on now.

Well for no other reason that I didn't realise until I started posting here that the formula on my recon CCA made it unenforceable: i.e. that adding it to the loan sum and then dividing it by 60 payments was in breach of the CCA. £15,000 loan + £4356 interest Total amount payable £19,356 Monthly payment £322.60 Number of repayments = 60 Because I am little leery of simply relying on the U/E due to the address being wrong, I think the commutation of interest route adds a string to the bow.

So that makes all Masterloans of that period unenforceable?

Well guys at least we agree it is a complex area. We don't need to be friends but we do all want to sock it to the banks that screw us over. So, I do want to write the bank a goodbye letter. Having sat on it a few days, and taking into account the above posts (DX: stop paying hem; Andy don't give them too much info; and Peter's take on enforceability) which were all most helpful, I attach a draft. If there is anything glaringly wrong please, please advise. Then I will wait and post up Barclays' response (which will probably only come when they miss a payment, lol) BTW, I have never been provided with annual statements or notices of sums in arrears, contrary to both s.77A and ss.86B–D. Draft - Barclays.pdf S.9 (4) For the purposes of this Act, an item entering into the total charge for credit shall not be treated as credit even though time is allowed for its payment ? Doc2.pdf

I can’t be alone in being confused by it all. I’m not familiar with this stuff. The confusion arises from being told they don’t need the original for enforceability and then they do. Then that interest and rebate made a difference, which it doesn’t. If I am alone in that confusion I can only apologise. : -(

Peter, I think you said in one post that the total credit in my reconstructed CCA contained the interest that should have been rebated, and this is in breach of the Act. can you identify the section in the Act Barclays were in breach of? Its all unenforceable anyway as already advised...interest and rebates are irrelevant...they dont have a copy of the original. I want to be clear about ref the recon: The loan was £15K plus £4356 interest preloaded to it. Monthly repayments were £322.60. So that makes 10.9% APR doesn't it? What do you mean when you say they calculated the APR to be compliant with the s.77 request? Surely the recon reflects the 2003 original and they didn't;'t work it our after the event? Or have I missed something? Where I'm coming from is the unenforceability issue ref the interest being out contra 127(3). but is it? they do not have to poses the original agreement, they can populate a template from other sources to produce a compliant copy. All, I think, I have on this that is non-compliant is the address, which was not mine at that time. The original CCA would have had that, hence its central importance?

“If the agreement is none cancellable one then there must be a date of execution on the agreement but there need not be a date on either signature.” There is no date on my recon CCA. Relevant to enforceability? Also as a recon it’s unsigned

Can they correct it, pre-2007 CCA, if they sent a 'true copy' already?

Consumer Protection (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000. They apply to contracts "concluded between a supplier and a consumer under an organised distance sales or services provision scheme run by the supplier who, for the purposes of the contract, makes use of one or more means of distance communication" up to and including the moment the contract is agreed. The legislation provides rights to the consumer and obligations which the seller must fulfill. If the supplier has provided all the information to be communicated before contract formation, the consumer has an automatic right to cancel and rescind a contract at any time from its formation until seven working days after the goods are delivered; or for service contracts, seven working days after the contract is formed (which might be before the service was to have been performed)] Where the supplier has not provided the consumer with all the required information, the consumer has an automatic right to rescind the contract within three months and seven days of delivery of the goods. Burden of proof problem for me then isn't it? At least on the cancellation rights. The grounds for unenforceability still stand on the other heads we discussed? So how does this read? Any good? Draft - Barclays.pdf

I'm sure I'm being a bit thick here but ref CCA s.67 are you saying the bank are right about there being no requirement for cancellation clause? Also, ref s.10 Consumer Contracts SI, this is 2013 and presumably is not retrospective?

How's this? Draft - Barclays.pdf

Thanks guys. I will be putting a letter together to Barclays and will cease making payments I will post it up here for comment prior to sending. However, do I put the account in formal dispute to halt debt collection activities? But if I do that, wouldn't it mean they can't sell it on (which is what we want them to do)?

Attached are 2 letters from Barclays received several years ago about an earlier complaint I raised on just these issues.... doc09188020190401171524.pdf doc09187920190401171512.pdf

i'm sure when they wake up they'll cobble something together, but yes, as of next instalment and 16 years on, I will stop paying them. I seem to have enough to query the validity of the recon.

Does the fact it is undated impact on it? The recon is itself quite old now, 6 years, as I have been paying a long time. I've been too chicken to take the bank on I have sent in a fresh CCA to see if what they reproduce matches it. I was hoping to catch them out.. However, Barclays have not responded to my latest CCA request which is now over a month overdue.

2003. The recon contains no date.

...and my paying it over the past 16 years makes no difference? The court cannot impose validity because it is pre-2007 despite the CPR? Part 3.10 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) provides: "General power of the court to rectify matters where there has been an error of procedure 3.10 Where there has been an error of procedure such as failure to comply with a rule or a practice direction- the error does not invalidate any step taken in the proceedings unless the court so orders; and the court may make an order to remedy the error."

It was an address I used at one point, not at time I took out loan.

Indeed, and I have re-read that over and again. It is the s.127 enforceability that confuses me though. To be compliant an agreement ordinarily requires "cancellation clause applicable to the executed agreement." However, this was taken out in 2003 via post. Barclays are saying it doesn't require cancellation rights and I think you have concurred with that view? So, looking at my particular CCA above, and in light of the particular circumstances of the postal offer and acceptance that was made, is it agreed that it does not need any cancellation rights top be enforceable in court? Assuming that to be the case, my options are either (1) pay Barclays; (2) stop paying and hope they sell to a DCA who I can tie up in knots until it gets statute barred in 6 years' time? If you read the MSE thread (link above), aside from the dirt debtor /you sepnt it pay them posts, they are indicating the banks lawyers will chew me up and spit me out. Nervous about taking Barclays on with this recon CCA....

any update here?

The problem is that they have reconstructed it and sadly, I do not have a copy of the original. You stated above that it is enforceable. Do you mean enforceable for the CCA or enforceable in court? If the latter, my options are either to pay it off ASAP as per MSE advice, or else to do what DX100uk suggests and stop paying and hope the bank sell it to a DCA. Then tackle the DCA as I am doing with Cabot on my other thread. Is there any risk, do you think, that Barclays (the original creditor) may seek a CCJ ?

Thank you for your replies. I would like to say I have found CAG more knowledgeable, helpful and much, much less judgemental than MSE. I now have a clearer idea of where I stand when corresponding with Sharkleys. Just one question: can Barclays reconstitute a pre-2007 CCA??

Here’s a copy of the recon CCA. Unsigned (obviously), undated, no apparent cancellation clause? Is it irredeemably unenforceable? Would I have a defence if the bank go for a judgement? Particularly, is the banks letter to me correct? They wrote: “At the time this agreement was entered into, there would have been no cancellation rights applicable in either of these circumstances. We therefore consider that the copy agreement we sent to you in response to your s.77 request contains all the relevant terms, complies with all requirements applicable at the time the agreement was entered into and is therefore a true copy for the purposes of s77. Our agreement with you is therefore legally enforceable.” CCA anon.pdf

Thank you, Andyorch

A lot of this Egg stuff is pre-2007, so is Wilson still relevant?