1st Credit - Citi Card debt - 6 questions!

[dx100uk]

most of your questions have already been answered at least once..

 

1. they don't need to have signed T&C's but a signed agreement.

2.they can yes, ask for payment a debt in E&W is never extinguished unlike Scotland

3.the default [and the whole account] is removed AUTOMATICALLY noting to do with anyone else doing it.

4. probably

[1mper1um]

most of your questions have already been answered at least once..

 

1. they don't need to have signed T&C's but a signed agreement.

2.they can yes, ask for payment a debt in E&W is never extinguished unlike Scotland

3.the default [and the whole account] is removed AUTOMATICALLY noting to do with anyone else doing it.

4. probably

for

 

 

Thanks for your answers but I haven't asked question 1 before so look forward to an answer

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

after a long 6 years, my time is served in 4 weeks and so I have a few questions please.

 

1) 1st Credit have repeatedly failed to provide the signed Ts & Cs for the Citicard debt I doubt they ever will but

just supposing they do, after the default has expired,

is my time still served or can they at that point*****, even 8 years after taking over the debt and applying the default,?????******

take action (eg: court, CCJ, charge against my house)?

 

 

****** Answer The "reconstituted" agreement (Ts & Cs) is intended to satisfy a CCA request and does not need to have any signatures. *****

 

 

**** All default entries on CRA files are removed after 6 years paid or not, this does not mean the debt is not still collectable.****

 

 

2. **** The Limitations Period ( 6 years, 5 in Scotland) started on the date when a contractual payment was due and not made, after which no further payment and/or unequivocal written admission of liability was made. However in England and Wales the debt still exists and remains payable, in Scotland the debt is extinguished.***I

 

 

**** as to pursuing an SB debt " It may be considered to be unfair to continue to press for payment once the debtor has informed the creditor of the status of the debt, to do so May amount to harassment.****

 

 

3. ***** The removal of defaulted accounts from CRA files is automatic on the 6th anniversary of the default date, the creditor/DCA does not manage this event.*****

 

 

4. **** 1st Credit do routinely check on the viability of debts on its books, so not an unusual action.*****

 

 

You will need to be absolutely sure of the date regarding the last payment made, and has any written acknowledgement been made in 6 clear years.

 

 

You say that it has been 8 years since 1st Credit acquired the debt, is this Still on your credit files, If so something is clearly wrong ( see above removal of defaults from CRA files).

2) Can they still harrass me in chasing of the debt even though the 6 years will be up?

 

3) Can they be awkward and be slow in removing the default from my file?

And do you recommend writing to them to make sure it's removed

or is that likely to antagonise them and make them difficult considering they didn't get a bean out of me?

 

4) Apart from being sent ureconstituted Ts and Cs 2 years ago (which they said I requested though I didn't) all has been quiet from them.

 

All until now.

 

2 weeks ago they sent (saying I requested though I didn't) copies of all the monthly statements from Citi cards and

 

today they called asking to speak to me (which was denied).

 

Is this just coincidence or is it because they know time is running out and they're trying one last push?

 

 

Thanks

 

 

See above

[1mper1um]

Thanks for the response Brigadier though I am still unclear on the rights of 1st Credit so apologies if the point has been made.

 

Background: this debt is from 2003 - before the rules were changed in the creditors' favour - and they need signed paperwork to enforce payment or court action and I am currently waiting out the 6 years and the default which was applied in August 2008.

 

What I specifically need to know is can they take legal action at any point if they ever produce the signed paperwork or are they limited to this 6 year window? Dx100UK pointed out that a debt in England is never extinguished and so the creditor can keep asking for payment but is that all they can do? I can happily ignore such requests but I don't want to still be worried for the rest of my life that the postman is going to deliver a signed agreement that is legally enforceable. Not to mention it would be a bummer to have served the 6 years on the credit blacklist only to get hit by a CCJ in 10 years time and get blacklisted all over again.

 

 

You will need to be absolutely sure of the date regarding the last payment made, and has any written acknowledgement been made in 6 clear years.

I have never made a single payment to 1st Credit or any debt collector working on behalf of this defaulted account. I have sent them letters - the last of which a few years ago - denying recognition of the debt and asking asking for a copy of the signed agreement as per the templates and advice given in this thread.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

1st Credit could attempt to start a claim right up to the line e.g. the day before the debt becomes statute barred thus stopping the 6 year clock.

What dx has said is totally correct.

 

 

Even IF a compliant agreement enforceable agreement should appear any court action must be started prior to the debt becoming stat barred.

[1mper1um]

Aha, thank you for the clarification

 

As I have never acknowledged the debt is mine does the statute barring end on the 6th anniversary of the default being applied?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Aha, thank you for the clarification

 

As I have never acknowledged the debt is mine does the statute barring end on the 6th anniversary of the default being applied?

correct.

[dx100uk]

SB never 'ends'

 

good pointers are:

 

that if 6yrs has passed since the defaulted date

and

the debt has vanished from the CRA

and

you made no payments

and

you've never sent a letter specifically acking the debt

 

that...

 

it will now be statute barred.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

SB never 'ends'

 

good pointers are:

 

that if 6yrs has passed since the defaulted date

and

the debt has vanished from the CRA

and

you made no payments

and

you've never sent a letter specifically acking the debt

 

that...

 

it will now be statute barred.

I think he meant the 6 year wait for the debt to become SB dx.

[1mper1um]

A weird thing happened the other day. 6 years after Citi passed the debt to 1st Credit and a default applied I received a similar letter to one they sent me 6 years ago saying they are passing the debt the Citi and that they no longer have anything to do with the account. I just want to make sure this doesn't impact the debt becoming SB in a month's time.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

A weird thing happened the other day. 6 years after Citi passed the debt to 1st Credit and a default applied I received a similar letter to one they sent me 6 years ago saying they are passing the debt the Citi and that they no longer have anything to do with the account. I just want to make sure this doesn't impact the debt becoming SB in a month's time.

 

 

Hi, is this 1st Credit passing the debt back to Citi ? If so my guess is that 1st Credit is aware of the nearing stat barred status and want nothing more to do with it.

[1mper1um]

Hi, it's the other way around - a letter from Citi saying they have passed the debt to 1st Credit as of a date last week. But it was passed to them 6 years ago and that is when the default was applied and when they sent a similar letter saying I must only communicate with 1st Credit.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi, it's the other way around - a letter from Citi saying they have passed the debt to 1st Credit as of a date last week. But it was passed to them 6 years ago and that is when the default was applied and when they sent a similar letter saying I must only communicate with 1st Credit.

 

 

Totally ignore then!!

[1mper1um]

Will do!!!!!

 

Cheers

[1mper1um]

Update.

 

As my last messages illustrated there seems to have been some memory-loss as almost 6 years after Citi & 1st Credit advised the debt was being passed over, they both sent the initial letters out again.

 

I've gone from barely one half-hearted request for payment in a year to 3 in the past month. The consensus was 1st Credit were trying to get payment before the debt become statute barred in the next fortnight. Today I received a letter that I think I can ignore - because it's just more hot air and even if it's legit, they will run out of time to act before the SB kicks in - but I want to be sure.

 

The letter, dated 13th August, is titled county court proceedings being considered and reads: "We regret the sum detailed remains outstanding. We are therefore considering issuing County Court proceedings against you. If we issue processdings we will claim (lists legal fees). If we obtain a judgement against you and it is unpaid for 30 days it will be entered in the Register of Judgements, Orders and Fines, making it difficult to obtain credit at competitive rates." It them goes on to mention further failure to pay can result in bailiffs and attachment of earnings before kindly providing a telephone number to call to avoid court action.

 

Am I right that this can be safely ignored? They were this belligerent when they first got the debt and it seems like they're just going through the "new debtor" motions again (the welcome letter they sent me indicates they think I am a new account). Or should I reply with a letter stating how they failed to provide signed documentation as in accordance with CPUTR, that they'll get laughed out of court for proceeding without it, and repeat my request for the signed forms? I don't really want to just in case they do have a look and Sod's Law, find the paperwork with my signature with just a few days to go before statute barring.

 

 

Thanks

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Update.

 

As my last messages illustrated there seems to have been some memory-loss as almost 6 years after Citi & 1st Credit advised the debt was being passed over, they both sent the initial letters out again.

 

I've gone from barely one half-hearted request for payment in a year to 3 in the past month. The consensus was 1st Credit were trying to get payment before the debt become statute barred in the next fortnight. Today I received a letter that I think I can ignore - because it's just more hot air and even if it's legit, they will run out of time to act before the SB kicks in - but I want to be sure.

 

The letter, dated 13th August, is titled county court proceedings being considered and reads: "We regret the sum detailed remains outstanding. We are therefore considering issuing County Court proceedings against you. If we issue processdings we will claim (lists legal fees). If we obtain a judgement against you and it is unpaid for 30 days it will be entered in the Register of Judgements, Orders and Fines, making it difficult to obtain credit at competitive rates." It them goes on to mention further failure to pay can result in bailiffs and attachment of earnings before kindly providing a telephone number to call to avoid court action.

 

Am I right that this can be safely ignored? They were this belligerent when they first got the debt and it seems like they're just going through the "new debtor" motions again (the welcome letter they sent me indicates they think I am a new account). Or should I reply with a letter stating how they failed to provide signed documentation as in accordance with CPUTR, that they'll get laughed out of court for proceeding without it, and repeat my request for the signed forms? I don't really want to just in case they do have a look and Sod's Law, find the paperwork with my signature with just a few days to go before statute barring.

 

 

Thanks

 

 

I would wait and see what 1st Crud comes up with next.

I would not be at all surprised to see them attempt to produce

a "reconstituted" agreement at the last minute, which will satisfy

the CCA request but may be useless in court.

[1mper1um]

I would wait and see what 1st Crud comes up with next.

I would not be at all surprised to see them attempt to produce

a "reconstituted" agreement at the last minute, which will satisfy

the CCA request but may be useless in court.

 

They produced reconstituted forms in the past, with no signature, and as this was a card issued in 2003 (before the law changes) I was told (when I started this thread) that those forms are useless and advised me to point that out to them, along with the fact they are not what is required nor what I requested. After a brief correspondence with a 1st Credit employee who tried to fudge the law (detailed in this thread) I stuck to my guns and that is when they went deathly quiet. In which case how can reconstituted be good enough now?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

They produced reconstituted forms in the past, with no signature, and as this was a card issued in 2003 (before the law changes) I was told (when I started this thread) that those forms are useless and advised me to point that out to them, along with the fact they are not what is required nor what I requested. After a brief correspondence with a 1st Credit employee who tried to fudge the law (detailed in this thread) I stuck to my guns and that is when they went deathly quiet. In which case how can reconstituted be good enough now?

OK just state that until an "enforceable " contract is supplied no further correspondence will be entered into.

[1mper1um]

Righty ho! As they need the original signed agreement to go to court it makes one wonder why they send the recons out in the first place. I feel bad for people who have been duped by these recons and accompanying letters saying "there's your proof - we have you by the balls".

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Righty ho! As they need the original signed agreement to go to court it makes one wonder why they send the recons out in the first place. I feel bad for people who have been duped by these recons and accompanying letters saying "there's your proof - we have you by the balls".

Recons are sent to satisfy CCA requests.

[1mper1um]

Yes, what I meant is it doesn't satisfy my request for the original - which is required for them to take legal action such as CCJs. Until then they're limited to begging letters for payment and numerous "one time" deals of 40% off. That some people will give in when they get the recons is what's dismaying. All they had to do was come here and get all this fantastic advice!

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Yes, what I meant is it doesn't satisfy my request for the original - which is required for them to take legal action such as CCJs. Until then they're limited to begging letters for payment and numerous "one time" deals of 40% off. That some people will give in when they get the recons is what's dismaying. All they had to do was come here and get all this fantastic advice!

The absence of the CCA only prevents enforcement via the courts, the recon satisfies the request made under section 77/78 of CCA 1974 (as amended 2003/2006 etc.) the debt remains payable an can be reported to CRAs.

 

 

If their collection activity reaches levels that amount to harassment suitable action can be taken.

[1mper1um]

I'm confused. The earlier parts of this thread said (as this is an agreement prior to the 2006 CCA changes) that unless they produce the signed original that the agreement is unenforceable and no legal action can take place (CCJ, charging orders, bankruptcy, attachment of earnings etc) and that as long as I don't acknowledge the debt it becomes statute barred after 6 years. The debt was registered with the CRA in 2008 and is due to be expunged in 2 weeks when the 6 years are up and the default has run it's course. That should be the end of the matter and I will be at no risk of legal action and can start to rebuild my credit. Are you saying otherwise?

 

On page 3 of this thread we had this exchange and we were on the same page at that point:

 

You:

Hi, Just for info there are no longer

any penalties for non compliance with

a CCA Request, if the don't have the original

agreement a reconstituted agreement can

be sent, no signature is required and as long as

it has the original and varied T's & C's it fulfills

the CCA Request, if the DCA can produce statements

and or a signed application form, it may well be difficult

to challenge.

 

ME:

This is a credit agreement prior to 2006 where such rules are still in force.

 

YOU:

OK, that's fine, I take it that they

have not confirmed that they do not

have the original agreement?

[1mper1um]

Just to highlight my confusion (sorry!) here is one of the quotes from earlier that say once the 6 years are up, I'm in the clear.

 

 

Scabhumter

You are asking for a signed copy of the credit agreement which must contain all the prescribed terms as laid down by the consumer crediticon Act to be legally enforceable.

 

There will still be black marks against you with the credit agencies. You will only not have to repay it as long as there is no enforceable CCA. If that lasts longer than six years, the debt will be statute barredicon and only at that point is the game over.

 

If they cannot produce the agreement, that puts you in a great position if you want to negotiate a full and final settlement. You can, of course, pay them nothing. Then, the risk is that if they do eventually come up with the agreement, they can press you to pay in full again. Only after six years of no payment or acknowledgement of the debt in writing does it become statute barredicon and unenforceable for ever.

 

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Just to highlight my confusion (sorry!) here are some extracts from earlier that are saying once the 6 years are up, I'm in the clear.

 

SteveH

Be aware that Citi are currently spouting some b*llsh*t about supplying current T&Cs being sufficient compliance with a S78 request. If they are going to take you to court, (which they would need to do if they wanted a CCJ/Charging Order/Sale of Property etc.) they will need to produce the original agreement with all prescribed terms and legible.

 

You are now in a poker game - do not blink. Whilst they cannot/will not produce a legible, compliant CCA agreement they are powerless. They will rant, rave, scream, throw their teddies about and generally sulk.

 

 

Scabhumter

You are asking for a signed copy of the credit agreement which must contain all the prescribed terms as laid down by the consumer crediticon Act to be legally enforceable.

 

There will still be black marks against you with the credit agencies. You will only not have to repay it as long as there is no enforceable CCA. If that lasts longer than six years, the debt will be statute barredicon and only at that point is the game over.

 

If they cannot produce the agreement, that puts you in a great position if you want to negotiate a full and final settlement. You can, of course, pay them nothing. Then, the risk is that if they do eventually come up with the agreement, they can press you to pay in full again. Only after six years of no payment or acknowledgement of the debt in writing does it become statute barredicon and unenforceable for ever.

 

CPUTR

As you are no doubt aware, you would need to have an original document in your possession before making some of threats mentioned in the body of your letter; courtesy of The Consumer Credit Act 1974; sec 127(3). I would therefore be grateful if you could confirm whether you currently hold, or have ever held, a properly executed, signed Consumer Credit Agreement pertaining to myself under the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR) 2008 and if not, to confirm so in your response.

 

 

 

 

 

In England and Wales a debt become statute barred after 6 years 5 in Scotland, IF there have been no payments from any source and no unequivocal written acknowledgment of liability made in the 6 year period.

 

 

However in England & Wales the debt Still Exists and remains payable ( the debt is expunged in Scotland) A creditor is only prevented from taking action to enforce.

 

The original OFT Guidance on Debt collection (now absorbed into the FCA handbook) stated that:

 

 

It may be considered unfair to pursue (for payment) a debt which is statute barred once the debtor has informed the creditor of the status of the debt, do so may amount to harassment.

 

 

A reconstituted agreement must have;

 

 

The Debtors name and address as at the inception of the agreement and the same for the creditor.

The Ts & Cs at inception and closure of the account.

Any material amendments to the Ts & Cs made during the life of the agreement and any document (s) mentioned in the Ts & Cs.

A current (not historic statement of the account)

 

 

This is to satisfy the CCA request:

 

 

The default date and the date a debt becomes statute barred are Not synonymous, a default is placed

often up to 6 months after say the last payment so debt could be statute barred months before the default will be removed from credit files, then you can have a situation where a debtor has at some point made a payment (usually in response from a DCA) which resets the 6 year clock from the date of the payment, this means that a default will be removed before the debt is statute barred.

 

 

It has nothing to do with the fact the creditor or DCA may or may not have the original agreement for a pre April 2006 contract.

 

 

A recon on a post April 2006 contract can be used in court and together with other evidence such as statements of payments to and usage of a credit facility may lead a judge on the balance of probabilities to determine that a liability subsists and the debt must be repaid.

 

 

The CCA request is not really intended as a method od disputing liability, English Civil Law is based on what is reasonable " in the balance of probabilities".