Mum Vs Argos/fredrickson Internatonal

[pigsic]

Hi there all

I was wondering cos Im waiting until after the weekend to get some letters posted. Sholud I send fredrickson that letter or offer them token payment of a pound a month which they probably wont accept cos littlewoods wont accept is and mum owes less to them.

Can I also ask when you make a token payment does it have to be the same amount to all the different creditors

cheers Lisa

[N.P]

Hi Lisa,

 

Why would you want to offer them anything at all? Send them the letter, let them work for it.

 

 

N.P

[The GodMother]

Make them work.

 

Have u been provided with a valid CCA?

 

No make them find it. Even if u have.

[pigsic]

Hi there

Just busy get my mum letter ready to send off tomorrow, done harrassment letter for fredrickson but i was wondering do you think I should wait until they pass the account to bryan carter cos they probably will they did with n.p. Pt did look at the credit agreement and he said he did not think it was valid cos of something about the apr.

lisa

[The GodMother]

If the CCA is invalid then send them a letter saying that.

 

DONT make any type of offer.

[pigsic]

If the CCA is invalid then send them a letter saying that.

 

DONT make any type of offer.

So would you send that account in dispute letter

lisa

[The GodMother]

Yep.

send them the account in dispute letter and tell them no payment will be made untill you recieve a valid CCA.

 

If they want to play sill idiots then let them as we can play that game as well.

[pt2537]

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

DO NOT IGNORE THIS LETTER

XX/XX/2008

 

Dear Sirs,

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

 

This account is in Dispute .

 

On xx/xx/2008 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 a mere 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 all 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

 

The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following--

1.Number of repayments;

2.Amount of repayments;

3.Frequency and timing of repayments;

4.Dates of repayments;

5.The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable

 

 

The agreement is missing the rate of interest to be applied to the account, of course if you are reliant upon the fact that that the document discloses the APR or annual percentage rate then I must inform you that the APR is incorrect.

The agreement quotes 25.9% now the figure under total charge for credit amount states £218.67

 

based upon that figure the amount of APR is actually 29.2% not 25.9% and this calculation has been done using the Office of Fair Tradings Dualcalc program and based upon the assumptions contained within schedule 7 of the Consumer Credit Agreements Regulations 1983 which sets out the following (quote taken from the Regulations)

 

[Assumptions about running-account credit

1

In the case of an agreement for running-account credit, the following assumptions shall have effect for the purpose of calculating the APR in place of the assumptions in Part 4 of the Total Charge for Credit Regulations that might otherwise

apply—

 

(1) in any case where there will be a credit limit but that limit is not known at the date of making the agreement the amount of the credit to be provided shall be taken to be £1,500 or, in a case where the credit limit will be less than £1,500, an amount equal to that limit;

 

(2) it shall be assumed that the credit is provided for a period of one year beginning with the relevant date;

 

(3) it shall be assumed that the credit is provided in full on the relevant date;

 

(4) where the rate of interest will change at a time provided in the agreement within a period of three years beginning with the date of the making of the agreement, the rate shall be taken to be the highest rate at any time obtaining under the agreement in that period;

 

(5) where the agreement provides credit to finance the purchase of goods, services, land or other things and also provides one or more of--

(a) cash loans;

(b) credit to refinance existing indebtedness of the debtor's, whether to the creditor or another person; and

© credit for any other purpose, and either or both different rates of interest and different charges are payable in relation to the credit provided for all or some of these purposes, it shall be assumed that the rate of interest and charges payable in relation to the whole of the credit are those applicable to the provision of credit for the purchase of goods, services, land or other things;

 

(6) it shall be assumed that the credit is repaid--

(a)in twelve equal instalments, and

(b) at monthly intervals, beginning one month after the relevant date.

 

 

Permissible tolerances in disclosure of the APR

1A

For the purposes of these Regulations, it shall be sufficient compliance with the requirement to show the APR if there is

included in the document--

(1) a rate which exceed the APR by not more than one; or

(2) a rate which falls short of the APR by not more than 0.1; or

(3) in a case to which either of paragraphs 2 or 3 below applies, a rate determined in accordance with the paragraph or such of them as apply to that case.]

 

 

Therefore the APR is incorrect based upon the fact that the agreement does not have a credit limit therefore the assumptions in schedule 7 must be used to calculate the APR and Total Charge for credit and clearly based upon those assumptions the APR is wrong

 

Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms as detailed above 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.

 

Further more, since the prescribed terms referred to above do not appear within the agreement your client has supplied, the agreement is rendered totally unenforceable, as the prescribed terms must be contained within the agreement and not a separate document, case law confirms this opinion

 

I refer you to the judgment of TUCKEY LJ in the case of Wilson and another v Hurstanger Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 299

 

”[11] Schedule 1 to the 1983 Regulations sets out the "information to be contained in documents embodying regulated

consumer credit agreements". Some of this information mirrors the terms prescribed by Sch 6, but some does not. Contrasting the provisions of the two schedules the Judge said:

 

 

"33 In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under s 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127(3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement. More detailed requirements, which

are designed to ensure that the debtor is made aware, so far as possible, of specified information (including information contained in the

minimum terms) are to be found in Schedule 1."

 

Also the document supplied is not easily legible in its entirety and therefore fails to comply with the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents)

Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1557) which states

 

 

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 .

 

I have highlighted the salient points for your attention from the Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents regulations

 

 

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

 

 

As it stands, the document supplied by your client 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, the Financial ombudsman service and the Office of Fair Trading.

 

It is my contention that based upon the advice I have received; the agreement supplied is unenforceable and fails to embody all the necessary terms for it to be enforceable

 

However should you believe that you have grounds to enforce this agreement, please provide me with a signed copy of the credit agreement that you would consider relying upon? 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 your clients have supplied as it stands is unenforceable, should you be unable to produce a compliant agreement it would be in everyone’s interest to consider the matter closed and for you 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

 

 

 

Hi Lisa that letter should shut them up about this argos agreement

[N.P]

Mmmmm,

 

What a guy!

 

He`s away sick for a while and he comes back with that.

 

PT for President

 

You never fail to impress, Paul.

 

 

 

N.P

[pt2537]

Cheers N.P

 

[The GodMother]

Nice one PT hope u are feeling bit better.

 

Can u look at the Deafult Notice:lol: that littlewoods sent to pigsics mum on the marshall ward thread i think i have seen u comment on toilet paper and the deafult notice B4 somewhere.

 

Chrissi

[pigsic]

Thanks everyone for your help will get that posted and keep you informed

lisa;)

[pigsic]

Pt, glad to see you back hope you feeling better but take is easy dont be doing to much

lisa

[pigsic]

Hi there all

Just an up date mum recieved one of those payment cards from fredricksons filled it under ignore have not heard back from lewtter that pt told me to send, so thats good

see ya lisa

[N.P]

Hi Lisa,

 

Now you`ve mentioned it, I haven`t heard from them also since I sent Bryan Carter Solicitors a letter, also supplied by PT.

 

I think we should all vote in PT for Prime Minister. At least he won`t force the Country in Bankruptcy.

 

Thanks Paul

 

 

N.P

[pigsic]

Hi all

Just an up date Fredrickson must of passed this back to argos but they have now passed the account to capquest who have sent a thretogram will get son to post it on for me today if someone can advice us where to go from here

lisa

[N.P]

Hi Lisa,

 

Depending on the contents of their letter you could probably send them the same letter in Post 83 (PT`s).

 

Just edit the start to something like `on date ****** you wrote to Fredrikson asking for a copy of your CCA and you are stumped as to why they have past the account to these fools`.

 

I received a threatofrom from Bryan Carters so I sent them my letter, the it went quiet for a while and then I heard from BJ Debt Recovery, so I sent them the same letter with a slightly edited start and I haven`t heard from them since. No doubt someone else will be along soon.

 

We`ll see what your letter reads.

 

You could also ask a Mod to change your thread title to suit.

 

Catch you soon.

 

 

N.P

Edited June 22, 2008 by N.P

[pigsic]

hi, here is the letter i was on about hope someone out there can help

thanks lisa

 

[N.P]

Hi Lisa,

 

WOW! That is VERY red, LOL.

 

Looks to me like all the other letters we get sent, only errrrr red.

 

Yes, like all the rest, they MAY take Court action.

 

Edit that letter as mentioned and fire it off to these bum bangers and see who you get next.

 

Regards

 

 

N.P

[pigsic]

Hi

I will get all letter done tomorrow when children are at school mum does not mind paying a pound a month do you think she should start paying or leave it for now

lisa

[N.P]

Hi

I will get all letter done tomorrow when children are at school mum does not mind paying a pound a month do you think she should start paying or leave it for now

lisa

 

 

It`s up to you and your mum Lisa. I`ve been through 3 DCA`s and a Solicitor and I`m not paying anything.

 

It`s gone all quiet again at the moment, not sure how long for though, LOL.

 

 

N.P

[The GodMother]

Is that the notice of assignment?

 

That is very laughable. I would be cheeky and put in your letter that they should notice from the file they would have been passed that The account is in dispute But as we know that is just me.

[N.P]

Also, if you can drag this out for 6 years it will become statue barred. As long as you don`t make any payments on the way, ie £1

 

Just thought, is this the first letter you have received from CrapQuest? Looks like they`ve used the red sheet to try and intimidate you into paying it. Clearly they don`t know you know more than them.

 

Send them a copy of my smackheads prove it letter, that will confuse them - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/143779-n-p-cetelem-lowell-2.html#post1548062

 

See what you get back from that

 

 

N.P

[The GodMother]

confuse they are confused as some new ppl needed to move into the office.

 

They needed a whole new desk as they have taken on to may dud cases.

[pigsic]

Hi there today mum received a letter from capquest heading letter before action but mum sent letter that PT posted in 83 but the letters have crossed in the post they sent theres on the 24 june and mum sent her on the 24 checked the tracking service and they received it on the 25 so should we just sit back and wait or send a reply

lisa