illegible agreement from Nat West

[Under Siege]

The credit agreement sent to me by Nat West is so blurred its as if they are having a laugh. (Its very late also)

 

Does this mean that they do not have a good copy themselves?

Has anyone had any experience of this?

[42man]

It may have been they have printed it off from an old microfiche (but bear in mind to make a CCA legally enforceable they have to produce the original in court) which they probably don't have !! (how old is the account ?).....there is a letter somewhere on here that states that they have sent an illegible copy....and by the way is it an agreement or is it an application form ?

[hellhasnofury]

The credit agreement sent to me by Nat West is so blurred its as if they are having a laugh. (Its very late also)

 

Does this mean that they do not have a good copy themselves?

Has anyone had any experience of this?

 

 

Complain to the Natwest, I have known of a few blurred copies to be sent to customers. Also send in a complaint to Trading Standards and the oft.

 

Section 2(1) of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 states quite specifically.....

.2 Legibility of notices and copy documents and wording of prescribed Forms

(1) The lettering in every notice in a Form prescribed by these Regulations and in 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, apart from any signature, be easily legible and of a colour which is readily distinguishable from the .

[Under Siege]

It is definitely unenforceable anyway, because although it is blurred I can see that nowhere does it state that it is an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act.

[Under Siege]

Update -

 

I still have not received a copy of my credit agreement. However I have received plenty of threatening letters from Triton credit services.

They have wrote today to inform me of their intention to commence legal proceedings.

Should I reply or just complain to trading standards?

[42man]

Hi UnderS...you'll need to edit this letter (courtesy of Curlyben or PT) to suit

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

 

DO NOT IGNORE THIS LETTER

XX/XX/2007

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

 

 

I note that you are acting as agents to Barclaycard therefore I draw your attention to the facts below.

 

This account is in Dispute .

 

On xx/xx/2007 I wrote to xxxxxxxxx requesting that xxxxxxx supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account.

In response to this request I was supplied an illegible application form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain any of the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553 for the definition of what is required. Suffice to say none of the terms are present in the document

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974, which states

 

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

 

This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states

 

 

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

In addition to the above, I note you have recently sent me a Default Notice under S87 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. I am sure you are aware a Default Notice is needed before a creditor can terminate the agreement or demand repayment. However the default must be accurate and comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561). The document purporting to be a Statutory Default Notice does not comply with the requirements of regulation 2(2) SI 1983/1561 and schedule 2 of the same document for the following reasons

 

Firstly, the document does not state the name and postal address of the creditor. I note that your address is present; you are not the creditor under this agreement. Also the document does not sufficiently state the nature of the breach and term of the agreement, which has been breached. Also the statutory terms, which are required to be capitalized, are not

 

For example

 

“IF THE ACTION REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE IS TAKEN BEFORE THE DATE SHOWN NO FURTHER ENFORCEMENT ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IN RESPECT OF THE BREACH ”

 

Or

 

“IF YOU DO NOT TAKE THE ACTION REQUIRED BY THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE SHOWN THEN THE FURTHER ACTION SET OUT BELOW MAY BE TAKEN AGAINST YOU [OR A SURETY]”.

 

However on your Default Notice these statements are shown in lower case and therefore not in compliance with the Consumer credit Act 1974 or the regulations referred to above

 

Also the regulations require the Default Notice to contain a statement in the following form—

 

"IF YOU ARE NOT SURE WHAT TO DO, YOU SHOULD GET HELP AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. FOR EXAMPLE YOU SHOULD CONTACT A SOLICITOR, YOUR LOCAL TRADING STANDARDS DEPARTMENT OR YOUR NEAREST CITIZENS' ADVICE BUREAU".

 

This excerpt is taken from the SI 1983/1561 itself and clearly your copy of the Default Notice does not contain this required statement either. There is a body of case law, which has confirms that where a statutory default notice issued under section 87(1) not compliant with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the subsequent Regulations it does not allow a creditor to terminate the agreement or demand repayment etc. In addition your attention is drawn to the fact that Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful termination of contract which would not only prevent a court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages via the ruling in the case of Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

 

Therefore you would be rather foolish to attempt to add any adverse data to my credit file while this account is subject to a Serious Dispute

As it stands, the document supplied by Barclaycard is not a valid credit agreement nor is it enforceable by any court

 

 

What I Require

 

 

Firstly, I require all correspondence in writing from here on; any persistent attempts to contact me by phone will be reported to Trading Standards.

 

I require you to produce a compliant copy of my credit agreement to confirm I am liable to you or any organisation, which you represent for this alleged debt, if you cannot do so I require written clarification that this is the case. Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40

 

Since the agreement is unenforceable and the default notice is non compliant, it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for your client to write the debt off. I suggest you give serious consideration to this as any attempt of litigation will be vigorously defended and I will counter claim for all quantifiable damages

 

I respectfully request a response to this letter in 14 days

 

I trust this out lines the situation

 

Regards

 

[Under Siege]

Thanks 42man

 

I will send an amended copy of today.

[citizenB]

Is there an update on this please