*** PLEASE HELP - Is My CCA Enforceable? ***

[A+]

Thank you Toymaker, i feel grateful for your time with that letter. However, i really can't possibly send any offer of anything. Lowell especially, but most of the DCAs i am dealing with have behaved so unprofessionally and ILLEGALLY too i might add, that i point blank refuse to pay a single penny until a JUDGE tells me to! I know this sounds extreme but thats just how angry i am. They can whistle. The debt is formally in dispute and i have clearly stated my reasons for that dispute in my last letter to them. Its also been sent recorded delivery with a signature proof of receipt so in my view its unlawful to progress anything whilst it is in dispute.

 

On reading it again, i only now realise what people have said above, that its a THREAT of a Stat Demand, not the real thing which was what worried me. Having said that, their 10 day alleged deadline is passed, so i will expect a SD any time now. The problem is i have NO idea where i go from here. I have never been this far down the road, and i DO NOT want to be made bankrupt because i am in the middle of REALLY solving my debt problems. Basically i am fighting hard to make SURE i sort creditors into two piles, one pile WITH VALID ENFORCEABLE agreements, the other pile are called my foxtrot oscar pile

 

Once i have done this, i am quite sure i will be able to negotiate with the ones who i genuinely have an agreement with, and this will be best for all concerned. What can i do? If RED force me down this route and make me bankrupt then the worst has happened, everything i have been doing has been to avoid bankruptcy. If i am going to be made bankrupt then i can tell every damn one of them to shove off and not pay anyone a penny (i don't have any money anyway, not even enough to send stuff by recorded delivery and nowhere near enough to SAR my creditors, however i have a friend who may lend me money once minimal settlements with real creditors are decided on).

 

By the way, if i have had a default notice served on me in the past for this alleged debt, should i scan and post it on this thread?

PLEASE SEND ANY EXPERIENCED CAGGERS THIS WAY, PRETTY PLEASE, THIS IS MY ULTIMATE NIGHTMARE BEGINNING TO UNFOLD

[A+]

HI again all of you, and thanks again for being there, really helps in these tricky times.

Just wanted to post a quick update. i was going through my folder full of letters in relation to this alleged debt, when i had a bit of a confused moment. i was sure my eyes must be playing tricks on me. Then i realised, i had a CARBON COPY of this last Stat Notice threat letter (shown above) around a YEAR ago. Nothing ever came of it. Not to say it wont this time, but it does look a bit like a circular process so maybe its just the typical rubbish from these DCAs as per usual.

Just in case it isn't, i have sent a letter to say that IF they were to go ahead with SD that it could be an abuse of process and that i would claim such in court. I also stated in BOLD that THIS DEBT IS IN FORMAL DISPUTE and as such i can not negotiate settlement when i am yet to have the debt proven to me with a CCA which abides by the ACt 1974.

Hope you all agree with this course of action.

[toymaker1]

i really can't possibly send any offer of anything. Lowell especially, but most of the DCAs i am dealing with have behaved so unprofessionally and ILLEGALLY too i might add, that i point blank refuse to pay a single penny until a JUDGE tells me to!

 

I know this sounds extreme but thats just how angry i am.

 

The debt is formally in dispute and i have clearly stated my reasons for that dispute in my last letter to them. so in my view its unlawful to progress anything whilst it is in dispute.

 

i DO NOT want to be made bankrupt because i am in the middle of REALLY solving my debt problems.

 

Basically i am fighting hard to make SURE i sort creditors into two piles, one pile WITH VALID ENFORCEABLE agreements, the other pile are called my foxtrot oscar pile

 

everything i have been doing has been to avoid bankruptcy. (i don't have any money anyway, not even enough to send stuff by recorded delivery and nowhere near enough to SAR my creditors,PLEASE, THIS IS MY ULTIMATE NIGHTMARE BEGINNING TO UNFOLD

 

As I understand it, your dispute is based upon your belief that Egg has not sent you a true copy of your regulated agreement, and that Egg have not clearly indicated to you your credit limit, but have instead referred to an "approved" limit.

From what I have read in your posts, unfortunately it does seem to me that Egg have provided you with a copy which would stand up in court. Also I believe a court would consider that a neutral person would understand Eggs use of the term "approved limit" - in the given context- to be understandable as meaning "credit limit".

Sorry about that, but there is no purpose served for any of us by ignoring realities.

What you have to do is damage limitation.

For example, just for something to think about, what about amending my suggested letter as follows:

 

Dear Alison Shepherd

 

Re: Over-indebtedness on Egg Credit Card Agreement 9999999999999

 

Thank you for your letter dated xxxxx in which you have requested me to forward to you my proposals for re-payment of the outstanding balance which has arisen as a consequence of my over-indebtedness to Egg.

 

 

I consider that my over-indebtedness to Egg can be resolved by means of the following proposal, which is made by me taking into account that I am currently experiencing extreme financial hardsh Therefore my proposal is intended to be affordable out of my very limited income, and is also intended to not increase my over-indebtedness to Egg.

 

If Egg will suspend interest on the amount of £00000 over-indebtedness as stated in your letter dated XXXXX (samed letter as above), I will pay a minimum of £1.00 per month (or what you can afford) per month until the total over-indebtedness of £00000 is re-paid.

It is my intention to propose similar arrangements to repay my other creditors who include xxxxxxx, xxxxxxx, xxxxx, and xxxxxx.

 

I will commence payments as outlined above immediately upon receipt of Egg's agreement. I hope that Egg will consider this to be an appropriate method of resolving the over-indebtedness which has arisen on my Egg credit card account.

 

I appreciate that Egg is not obliged to assist me but, should Egg seek a county court judgement against me in connection with my over-indebtedness to Egg, interest on any judgement amount would normally be suspended. Also, I would draw the court's attention to the fact that I had asked Egg to consider my proposal for re-payment of the over-indebtedness, and that Egg had refused, and to the fact Egg has not taken into account the extreme financial hardship I am currently experiencing. I therefore respectfully request Egg to consider my re-payment proposal contained in this letter.

 

I enclose a list of my approximate current income and expenditure, and of my other outstanding debts.

 

Yours etc.

 

The point about a letter like this is that it will clearly show the court that you have made a genuine attempt to resolve the problem without the need for court action. - It will put Egg on the back foot if they ignore it (which they probably will).

When Egg refuse your offer, it actually gives you the upper hand - you can claim the moral high ground, so to speak, in that you are trying to resolve the matter- which, by the way wont just go away.

 

An important point is to fix your debt at the amount it stands at when you make your repayment proposal.

In other words, from now on dont accept interest added to the debt. Tell them that any increase in the over-indebtedness has been caused by their delay in reaching a settlement with you.

 

 

By the way, EVERYTHING I AM TELLING YOU TO DO I HAVE DONE MYSELF (WITH EGG, MORGAN STANLEY, HALIFAX.

 

Regards

[toymaker1]

i really can't possibly send any offer of anything. Lowell especially, but most of the DCAs i am dealing with have behaved so unprofessionally and ILLEGALLY too i might add, that i point blank refuse to pay a single penny until a JUDGE tells me to!

 

I know this sounds extreme but thats just how angry i am.

 

The debt is formally in dispute and i have clearly stated my reasons for that dispute in my last letter to them. so in my view its unlawful to progress anything whilst it is in dispute.

 

i DO NOT want to be made bankrupt because i am in the middle of REALLY solving my debt problems.

 

Basically i am fighting hard to make SURE i sort creditors into two piles, one pile WITH VALID ENFORCEABLE agreements, the other pile are called my foxtrot oscar pile

 

everything i have been doing has been to avoid bankruptcy. (i don't have any money anyway, not even enough to send stuff by recorded delivery and nowhere near enough to SAR my creditors,PLEASE, THIS IS MY ULTIMATE NIGHTMARE BEGINNING TO UNFOLD

 

Getting angry, and allowing your anger to be reflected in your letters wont help resolve the problem.

 

As I understand it, your dispute is based upon your belief that Egg has not sent you a true copy of your regulated agreement, and that Egg have not clearly indicated to you your credit limit, but have instead referred to an "approved" limit.

From what I have read in your posts, unfortunately it does seem to me that Egg have provided you with a copy which would stand up in court. Also I believe a court would consider that a neutral person would understand Eggs use of the term "approved limit" - in the given context- to be understandable as meaning "credit limit".

Sorry about that, but there is no purpose served for any of us by ignoring realities.

What you have to do is damage limitation.

For example, just for something to think about, what about amending my suggested letter as follows:

 

Dear Alison Shepherd

 

Re: Over-indebtedness on Egg Credit Card Agreement 9999999999999

 

Thank you for your letter dated xxxxx in which you have requested me to forward to you my proposals for re-payment of the outstanding balance which has arisen as a consequence of my over-indebtedness to Egg.

 

 

I consider that my over-indebtedness to Egg can be resolved by means of the following proposal, which is made by me taking into account that I am currently experiencing extreme financial hardship. Therefore my proposal is intended to be affordable out of my very limited income, and is also intended to not increase my over-indebtedness to Egg.

 

If Egg will suspend interest on the amount of £00000 over-indebtedness as stated in your letter dated XXXXX (samed letter as above), I will pay a minimum of £1.00 per month (or what you can afford) per month until the total over-indebtedness of £00000 is re-paid.

It is my intention to propose similar arrangements to repay my other creditors who include xxxxxxx, xxxxxxx, xxxxx, and xxxxxx.

 

I will commence payments as outlined above immediately upon receipt of Egg's agreement. I hope that Egg will consider this to be an appropriate method of resolving the over-indebtedness which has arisen on my Egg credit card account.

 

I appreciate that Egg is not obliged to assist me but, should Egg seek a county court judgement against me in connection with my over-indebtedness to Egg, interest on any judgement amount would normally be suspended. Also, I would draw the court's attention to the fact that I had asked Egg to consider my proposal for re-payment of the over-indebtedness, and that Egg had refused, and to the fact Egg has not taken into account the extreme financial hardship I am currently experiencing. I therefore respectfully request Egg to consider my re-payment proposal contained in this letter.

 

I enclose a list of my approximate current income and expenditure, and of my other outstanding debts.

 

Yours etc.

 

The point about a letter like this is that it will clearly show the court that you have made a genuine attempt to resolve the problem without the need for court action. - It will put Egg on the back foot if they ignore it (which they probably will).

When Egg refuse your offer, it actually gives you the upper hand - you can claim the moral high ground, so to speak, in that you are trying to resolve the matter- which, by the way wont just go away.

 

An important point is to fix your debt at the amount it stands at when you make your repayment proposal.

In other words, from now on dont accept interest added to the debt. Tell them that any increase in the over-indebtedness has been caused by their delay in reaching a settlement with you.

 

 

By the way, EVERYTHING I AM TELLING YOU TO DO I HAVE DONE MYSELF (WITH EGG, MORGAN STANLEY, HALIFAX.

 

Regards

Edited April 2, 2009 by toymaker1
spelling, punctuation.

[militantconsumer]

From what I have read in your posts, unfortunately it does seem to me that Egg have provided you with a copy which would stand up in court. Also I believe a court would consider that a neutral person would understand Eggs use of the term "approved limit" - in the given context- to be understandable as meaning "credit limit".

Sorry about that, but there is no purpose served for any of us by ignoring realities.

What you have to do is damage limitation.

 

I do agree with everything Toymaker1 has said about how to deal with debt problems in general.

 

However, I also think there is some serious doubt about these Egg card agreements being enforceable or not, hence maybe a different tactic is required for them i.e. challenging them:

 

Right, to confirm

 

i work for a law firm, i have a claim in the County court in Wales near our office, it is against Egg, it is founded upon the arguments set out on here AND i have recieved counsels opinion at considerable costs and it supports our view both on the fact that the rate of interest for cash withdrawals is not qualified and also that the prescribed term is not correctly stated, lets not forget its "Consumer Credit Act" designed to protect the consumer its not called the "lender or Creditor Protection Act" is it?

 

blimey,

 

ther MUST be a term stating the credit limit or how it will be determind yes? does the word Approved limit cut it? NO, how ccan it, approved limit of what? withdrawals, how many curries you can by or how many pints in the pub? it MUSt be clear to the lay person that this is a term of that type and i submit that it is not,

 

i will post the judgment when i get it on here subject to my clients ok, of course in its edited form to remove my clients dtails

[A+]

Toymaker, i am VERY grateful to you for the time you have invested in me and my thread here. I am not ignorantly hoping this will go away, i spent 3 or 4 years behaving stupidly like that and this is crunch time so believe me that time is well passed for me. If bankruptcy is what cometh, bring it forth, i have no more time or emotional strength for running, and i would certainly take your advice (which is the same i have received from a friend who deals with lots of creditors and bankruptcy issues in his line of work) if i were of the belief that their agreement was enforceable, and if they had conducted my account honestly, without breaching my rights several time, which yes i do admit angers me.

The problem is, as Militant Consumer said, there is a LOT of serious talk on this forum on many different threads about these Egg agreements and their possible unenforceability. To be truthful, if i had even just a few thousand pounds spare, i would prefer to do what you suggested than argue the toss over a seemingly small point, not because it is right to do so (as i don't think its right to do so until a judge deems that agreement enforceable, which also assumed the orginal has turned up and its not a microfiche which i think it could be), but because i need LESS stress in my life, not more.

That coupled with the fact that its too late to call back my latest letter to them disputing the enforceability of the agreement and the prescribed terms therein, means i might as well wait and see what the response is now. The letter has already gone.

Where a debt is enforceable, your advice is as sound as a pound, but since i have disputed it, and since i am flat broke with nothing to offer them that i know they will accept, i will fight the enforceability all the way to court now. I really do want to see the original now also, as i don't remember signing it looking like this and i believe they may not hold the original agreement from past letters from them.

Thanks again for your input. If you think i am being unrealistic then thats your opinion and i respect that assuming you have, as you say, been there and done that. However whilst i have little to offer them, and whilst many other members of CAG claim these agreements are worth fighting about over enforceability issues, i will kick my heels into the ground now and let them take me to court if they so wish, i want to see the agreement and i want to hear a judge tell me that "Approved Limit" is a clear term which anyone can understand.

Thanks again. Going to ask pt2537 about his case as i didn't know about that, thanks MC.

[A+]

P.S. before i ever do negotiate settlement of any credit card debt, i would have to get hundreds of pounds of punitive fees and interest removed from the alleged balance, but don't have the funds for SAR as yet. Just out of interest, Toymaker, did you do this?

[toymaker1]

 

I think there is some serious doubt about these Egg card agreements being enforceable or not, hence maybe a different tactic is required for them i.e. challenging them:

 

I dont disagree with you,

I wish A the best of luck if they decide to carry on their fight with Egg/Lowells but one must also not try to hide from reality.

 

In the Central Trust plc V Spurway case, the essence of what HHJ Overend said was that "there should not be any confusion in the mind of the lay reader as to what what the amount of credit is"

In the specific example posted by A, it does seem to be clear that the term "approved limit" means in effect the approved credit limit. One would have to cross ones fingers very tightly to hope that a county court judge would not interpret it that way. - I think that in the specific situation posted by A it might be best to offer £1.00 a month with interest suspended. At the very least it would force Egg to continue negotiating. The court would not take kindly to a refusal by Egg to consider the situation of A.

There is no purpose in making a dispute into a never ending nightmare.

 

regards

[toymaker1]

P.S. before i ever do negotiate settlement of any credit card debt, i would have to get hundreds of pounds of punitive fees and interest removed from the alleged balance, but don't have the funds for SAR as yet. Just out of interest, Toymaker, did you do this?

 

I calculated that Egg's exsessive charges amounted probably to hundreds rather than than thousands of punds, so I decided that life is to short to fight every battle into infinity.

I accepted the amounted printed on the most recent Egg statement when the dispute started, and fixed that as the amount I would offer to repay.

The main advantages were,

1. I offered a monthly repayment amount I felt I could afford. (even £1.00 per month would be considered by a court).

 

2. My offer was conditional on suspension of interest - which a court judgement would stipulate anyway, so it would be difficult for a creditor to refuse that, even if they refuse it in the first instance, they would have to accept suspension of interest eventually.

Suspension of the interest and (say) £1.00 a month repayment is surely better than a never ending nightmare of uncertainty and stress. - Life is very short. Every pound you pay is a pound of the debt, as opposed to the "normal" situation where every pound you pay is about 20p off the debt!

3. having made an offer which fitted financial situation, I sat tight and refused to pay a penny until an agreement was reached.

 

Each time they refuse to accept my offer (i.e Morgan stanley halifax etc.) I politely ask them to reconsider it, and tell them I will draw the attention of the court to their refusal to consider my offer in the light of my financial situation, and my wish not to increase my over-indebtedness.

[lollipop73]

Told you they were clever.

[basa48]

Also I believe a court would consider that a neutral person would understand Eggs use of the term "approved limit" - in the given context- to be understandable as meaning "credit limit".

Sorry about that, but there is no purpose served for any of us by ignoring realities.

 

I suppose that might be a valid argument. However I still believe it is not a matter of whether someone may or may not understand 'approved' to mean 'credit'. The simple fact is Schedule 6 states a 'credit' limit must be specified, not what purports to be a credit limit or a reasonable person might construe as a credit limit.

 

"A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined .... blah, blah"

 

NOT approved or individual limit ... but CREDIT limit.

 

It is precisely because of the context of this agreement that makes use of the terms 'approved' and 'individual' limit so confusing. You expect to be quoted a 'credit' limit but aren't.

 

And why two limits? What the hell is THAT all about .. very confusing, even more so for less educated individuals.

 

Let's face it, I didn't understand approved limit and individual limit for a long time until I really read through everything.

 

There are other ways of trashing 'approved' and 'individual' but as Egg read these forums I don't want them to learn too much of the enemies plans.

Edited April 2, 2009 by basa48

[toymaker1]

I suppose that might be a valid argument. However I still believe it is not a matter of whether someone may or may not understand 'approved' to mean 'credit'. The simple fact is Schedule 6 states a 'credit' limit must be specified, not what purports to be a credit limit or a reasonable person might construe as a credit limit.

 

 

 

NOT approved or individual limit ... but CREDIT limit.

 

It is precisely because of the context of this agreement that makes use of the terms 'approved' and 'individual' limit so confusing. You expect to be quoted a 'credit' limit but aren't.

 

And why two limits? What the hell is THAT all about .. very confusing, even more so for less educated individuals.

 

Let's face it, I didn't understand approved limit and individual limit for a long time until I really read through everything.

 

There are other ways of trashing 'approved' and 'individual' but as Egg read these forums I don't want them to learn too much of the enemies plans.

 

You may well be correct in what you say.

Just saying how I see it. - everyone looks differently at the same thing.

 

regards.

[basa48]

You may well be correct in what you say.

Just saying how I see it. - everyone looks differently at the same thing.

 

regards.

 

Including a judge

 

I've made a few more observations here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2083129.html

[toymaker1]

[quote=A+;1765203 i am guessing (to save you explaining if i am correct) that a deed of assignment is a document of some kind which transfers the ownership of debt from Egg to Lowlife Financial. Am i right? Do i get a gold star?! :D

 

In this situation a deed of assignment is not required, because in this specific situation, as I understand it, Lowells are acting on behalf of Egg - it is as if Lowells is Egg. A notice of assignment would only be required if Lowells bought the debt from Egg, which, as I understand it, Lowell's hasn't.

 

regards

[A+]

Hi Toymaker, and thanks to you and everyone.

As for buying the debt, i can't say right now, but i am pretty sure Lowell have sent me a letter saying they own the debt, but i could be wrong there. Will check and get back to you on that score.

 

As for the arguments over credit limit/approved limit, NOBODY can say what is reasonable, sensible, appropriate etcetera except a JUDGE. Everything all of us have to say, is PURELY OPINION and this becomes an ARGUMENT at court, but thats it, nothing more.

 

Just as you say Toymaker, it comes down to how i want to proceed. The fact is if i got ALL interest payments and fees removed from the balance (including any levied by DCAs, unlawfully) then i MIGHT consider token payments, as i would rather settle for 10p in the pound one day than be taken bankrupt. Having said that, if they take me bankrupt, i have NOTHING which can be liquidated (house, car etc) as i own next to nothing other than a big headache

However, if i WAS taken bankrupt, i might as well write off all debts under that bankruptcy, but i would prefer NOT TO (even though i really have nothing to lose and many people have told me bankruptcy is by FAR MY BEST OPTION). I just don't WANT to do it. Hence the reason i am gonna argue everything i legally have an argument on, and the rest i will hopefully soon be able to negotiate a low full and final with.

Thanks to everyone chipping in here, really helps

[toymaker1]

As for buying the debt, i can't say right now, but i am pretty sure Lowell have sent me a letter saying they own the debt, but i could be wrong there. Will check and get back to you on that score.

 

I have looked at your letter from Lowell, and it refers to the Egg being the "original creditor". That would suggest that the Lowells is now the creditor, i.e. Egg sold the debt to Lowells when the account was in dispute. That is not permitted, and is a breach of OFT Debt Collection Guidance.

[BuzzMan]

 

 

 

Is it me, or is there something very wrong with both of these documents, I mean forensically speaking?..

[Undercover-Elsa]

You have a point Buzzman,

There's no good reason for the horizontal shaded lines over the signature boxes to carry on right to the right hand edge of the page. (I've seen an original of this type of agreement)

Possibly cut and pasted?

Looks like maybe a microfiche so possibly the rest of the document didn't reproduce well so they pasted the sig boxes onto a better copy?

Hmmm

Hey A+..still following your progress, keep your chin up:)

Elsa x

[cups]

Hi

 

Just had a quick read of this,,and see that someone else is looking at this like me, the two copies of the form seem to be different to me. I think that the type face is two different sorts. I would say the first is 'aerial' and the next something like 'new roman'. They seem to be the same font size but the actual type is different.

 

This would lead me to believe that they are two seperate forms that they are trying to pass off as the same.

 

Only my opinion.

 

Cups.

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi Cups,

Good point, but having seen an original that is definitely what they're like fontwise (unfortunately).

Elsa x

[BuzzMan]

You have a point Buzzman,

There's no good reason for the horizontal shaded lines over the signature boxes to carry on right to the right hand edge of the page. (I've seen an original of this type of agreement)

Possibly cut and pasted?

Looks like maybe a microfiche so possibly the rest of the document didn't reproduce well so they pasted the sig boxes onto a better copy?

Hmmm

Hey A+..still following your progress, keep your chin up:)

Elsa x

 

Ok, I know we're not playing puzzles but there's at least two more things that stand out on the front page

[Undercover-Elsa]

Ok Dr Quincy.. hmmmm...the angles of the paragraphs are out. More pasting? What else am I missing?

[BuzzMan]

Ok Dr Quincy.. hmmmm...the angles of the paragraphs are out. More pasting? What else am I missing?

 

Lol, not quite Dr Quincy, but I am a certified digital forensic analyst

so ok, hint - look between the pieces of the picture with different text inclinations

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hah! Should have known!

...More shading from the edge of pasted sections?

Y'know, if they're going to do it they should make the effort to do it right.

5 minutes in photoshop by a 7 year old would give better results!

[BuzzMan]

Hah! Should have known!

...More shading from the edge of pasted sections?

Y'know, if they're going to do it they should make the effort to do it right.

5 minutes in photoshop by a 7 year old would give better results!

 

have you noticed how there is a perfectly horizontal pattern that forms a line?.. seriously, are these guys banking on nobody ever disputing the authenticity of these documents in court?