As far as I can see from most people's posts on this forum, they confirm a long period of determination to have some sort of wrong against them righted (pardon the expression), and I feel that when most people read the posts, they will be able to tell in their hearts whether the writer has a real case. I genuinely belive that 99% of the folk on this forum have genuine greivances against the unfair treatment from the banks and just because it's not to do with Bank Charges doesn't make it any less valid a case to defend. In fact as I've stated previously, although I don't post much, I think it's as much a deserving cause if not more than reclaim of charges.. Reclaim of charges will be over and done with shortly.. The injustices of defaults illegally registered or innacurately registered is a much harder to push issue. Anybody who is prepared to give up on "the moral ground" is not seeing the big picture as far as I can see. Or just doesn't want to get involved "cause they know it takes some balls" to tackle that type of issue. But hey....... some people only want to take the eeeaaasy road....

Try Here... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/27877-lenders-havent-sent-me-6.html

It does seem to make a mockery of the fact that a Default Notice has to be worded exactly in the right format.. What's the point if they don't have to keep a copy..?

Incidentally if you feel like pushing a bit harder try this.... Send to the directors.. Dear Mr lhklklh I have an ongoing dispute with you concerning a default which was registered incorrectly in 2001. So far the response from you in relation to this matter has been totally unsatisfactory. Considering that non-compliance with the terms of the CCA can warrant that, individuals within the company concerned can be held personally responsible if they condoned of, or where aware of the breaches of the Act, (see enclosed text from the CCA) I am now formally making you aware that it is my belief that there have in fact been a number of breaches of this Act, and the Banking Code to which you subscribe. I give you formal notice that this is my Letter before Court Action. If this issue is not resolved to my satisfaction by Wed 27th September 2006, I will proceed with my claim through the legal system, in which you will be named as the defendant in my action. Regards This is the exact text from the CCA " Where an offence under this Act has been committed by a body corporate and is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of or to be attributable to any neglect on the part of any director, manager, secretary or similar officer of the body corporate or any person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he as well as the body corporate shall be guilty of that offence and be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly."

Totally agree ... At it's worst it's a big bargaining chip.

Un1boy... Go for it. Worst that can happen They produce the document and then ...They would have to get a judge to continue to ask for the money. I would be tempted, if you haven't already, to issue a SARS request, then when they reply, send a letter back asking "Are you positive you have supplied ALL information. When they agree they have, I would suggest they would be classed as misleading you if they then later produce it. Again I am not saying that this should be done "just to write the debt off off" for the sake of it but if you have genuine justification... So Be It... Un1boy... This is no different to the legitimate right of individuals to claim back charges.. The CCA is there for a reason.. They are breaking the Law... There is no middle ground.....In my opinion of course.

It seems to me this Very site was built to offer consumers clear guidance to enforce their rights AS consumers.. Every bit of advice given should be regarding their empowerment. The law should not be seen as open to wishy-washy interpretation. God I hate Moral / Political correctness. If a bank can not be bothered to keep a copy of something as fundemental as the original agreement.??? Duhh They could demand anything they want. These reclaims for charges on this very site are a case of point... If they could, the banks would use every technicality they could find, and do , to get out of the bank charges scenario. Do not lose focus on the fact that hundreds of thousands of peoples very lives are been crippled by, Not Bank Charges, but by financially dafamatory, unlawful, frivolous, punitive and excessive information. Anybody who is trying to fight back on these issues need support, and all the help they can get. It's a much harder struggle than claiming bank charges back. Ask Surlybonds, Un1boy, Jimmyfishbob. These people are pushing the boundaries and, point of law for the good of all on this site... Long May It Continue. As for your thoughts HSBCrusher. "immoral but incredibly stupid" and ...."you are in the wrong place." I don't think you are the one to decide that. Why would a bank need to ask you to sign documentation at all before releasing funds. Why regarding the text in a default notice is the wording so Exact. It is there to be followed, By Both Parties. These laws have been pondered over and put into effect for reasons. The ONLY reason charges are able to be claimed back is because it is a breach of the rules of the Consumer Credit Act. If you want to be really Moral then you should say to yourself " I'm not claiming charges back as they are my own fault, I went overdrawn,, etc etc Consider the lengths the banks go to to prevent the people on this forum from enforcing ANY of their rights.

So.... " If you were the individual in the above example, and you were 3 years down the road, exhausted every avenue and could, legally withold payment until they (the bank) fulfilled their Legal obligation ....What would you do ? Nobody is suggesting breaking the Law. On the contrary ... As you have just quoted "fighting back within the law" is exactly the point... If you relax part of the CCA regulations.....ie providing documentation then you might as well dissalow the whole Act while you are on.. The CCA was set up with a purpose to protect consumers and Banks alike.. It should be adhered to to the letter. If they break the Law then they don't deserve to be able to enforce the loan.. Which other parts of the Act would you want to put to one side on the "Moral Ground"

Whether it's a default wrongly applied or just pure punitive obstruction..which incidentally applies to most peoples grievances on these forums... When it comes to the banks breaking the law ie.. terms of the CCA. I think all bets are off.. After all the General Public is at an enormous disadvantage in the battle with the banks.. Look at our position in relation to them. They have unlimited legal expertise..They have unlimited funds.. The organisations designed to protect us are impotent.. The ICO useless The FSO They'll let you know in 6 months to a year. Trading Standards ? The CRA's.. "The Bank says its right. Therefore it is" As you have probably guessed ..I have no sympathy with them.

I'll give you an example.. Say you borrowed £5000 5 years ago. Lost your job, called the bank while you were making full payments and asked to reduce them temporarily.. The bank said "yes, Ok that'll be alright. 3 payments later they default you without notice... You genuinely find out a year later when you apply for a re-mortgage. This costs you 6% more than you should be paying £26,000 more over it's term.. You cant even get a mobile phone.. You can't change your car. You've got a business and you need money to expand.. The bank refuse to lend because "You have a default against you" etc etc etc.. The evidence you have that the default was registered unlawfully..and they refuse to remove it... How much is that worth? All I am saying is that each individual has a different set of circumstances and I, certainly will not try and make out that someone is "Immoral" if they try and get "Justice" for themselves.. How much "Justice" is fair is the question they need to answer to themselves.

I understand that. But what I am saying is that the banks do not deserve any favours, they give none.. Sometimes the tone seems to give the impression " we should give the banks some slack" .. I don't belive that for a moment,, At least not when I read the posts on this forum They should be hung out to dry.

I swear if any of us add up the monetary value of all the aggravation, time and effort.. Not even taking into account the defamation of character it would amount to considerately more than we get in claiming...

HI regarding the issue of whether you should pay the debt back "morally" or not is not quite as straight forward as you make out Barracad.. Many people on this forum have been penalised considerably and unjustly by the banks.. I'm damn sure that if there was the slightest breach of any clause in contract by one of us then the bank in question would not hesitate to act immediately.. Hell they do it without any breaches.. WHY should they be aloowed to flout an Act of Parliament...Supposed to be Law..

I also received an acknowledgement from Experian who after sending irrefutable evidence of an incorrectly issued default have refused to remove it.. After all MBNA said it was correct... So it must be true

Hi Tobes There may be more people interested than you think.. I have just had acknowledgement that MBNA will defend my claim of that nature. There isn't much on the forum about removing incorrectly registered defaults without using the "big stick" of charges reclaim..