ihpj vs. NatWest Cards (CCA Request) - My Contribution

[ihpj]

** ADVICE **

 

I am thinking I should send a very brief letter in reply directing them to my correspondence as in Post #53 and wait for the [first] DCA to contact me and bounce them back.

[ihpj]

files arent there or I cant see them... sorry! [edit] URL/web address looks wrong www.[domainname].[org] should be the format?

 

I wrote that post first, while scanning the document in the background, both pages should be up now!

[davey77]

I wouldn't even bother replying myself.

 

It all depends on how you feel about sitting back and waiting for the DCA. Remembering that you will have 2-3 months of letters telling them to get lost whereby they will pass it on to another DCA.

If you are happy with that scenario and have no need to be proactive/aggressive then sure.

 

But, the options are really back to my post 52 and/or see if a Solicitor can get movement on matters for you if possible.

 

Did you report them to TS in the end?

[Kaiser99]

I note that they are asking you to cut up your card and return it to them.

 

Don't do that whatever else you decide to do. It could be used against you in court.

[ihpj]

I wouldn't even bother replying myself.

 

It all depends on how you feel about sitting back and waiting for the DCA. Remembering that you will have 2-3 months of letters telling them to get lost whereby they will pass it on to another DCA.

If you are happy with that scenario and have no need to be proactive/aggressive then sure.

 

But, the options are really back to my post 52 and/or see if a Solicitor can get movement on matters for you if possible.

 

Did you report them to TS in the end?

 

I am/have been lazy in not reporting NatWest to TS/FoS...I really should get onto that; but seeing as I am in no real hurry for them to locate and then send me the required information (I am happy to withold payment), and I remain confident in my ability to negate any DCA that may even try to contact me, I think I will let the situation continue.

 

Once I have kicked back a couple of their DCAs - I think it will illustrate to them that (and thanks to the CAG) I actually do know my rights and will hold my ground to the fullest - that it might then be time to enter into negotiations with them of my making a FFS with them.

[ihpj]

I note that they are asking you to cut up your card and return it to them.

 

Don't do that whatever else you decide to do. It could be used against you in court.

 

Not that I had intended to return the card to them, but can I ask why I shouldn't do this?

[Kaiser99]

Hi ihpj,

 

This thread will explain why, it is posted in the Debt Collection Industry forum.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/179236-tragic-case-judgement-because.html

 

It is probably a one off, but better to be safe than sorry!

[ihpj]

Many thanks for the link Kaiser99 - interesting read!

[davey77]

I am/have been lazy in not reporting NatWest to TS/FoS...I really should get onto that; but seeing as I am in no real hurry for them to locate and then send me the required information (I am happy to withold payment), and I remain confident in my ability to negate any DCA that may even try to contact me, I think I will let the situation continue.

 

Once I have kicked back a couple of their DCAs - I think it will illustrate to them that (and thanks to the CAG) I actually do know my rights and will hold my ground to the fullest - that it might then be time to enter into negotiations with them of my making a FFS with them.

 

If you are 'happy' with the way it's going and can sit back and see what happens next them all well and good.

Remember the FOS will not back you up concerning the supply of a credit agreement and their 'opinions' may prove to have annoying consequences. (See my Cap1 thread for the kind of response you will get.)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/171391-davey77-capital-one.html

 

Having said that it does cost the creditor £500 when you make a complaint so that's something

 

Natwest are telling everybody (lost count of the number of people now) that they do not have the original agreement. I guess it's always possible but i find it highly unlikely they would come up with it now. So i wouldn't be concerned on that front too much. Therefore i would try to get TS on the case and see what resolution they might be able to come up with.

 

Personally i think the best time to try for a F&F is when (if) the account is sold outright. Which can take years (2 in relation to my Halifax account.) So you'll have a few DCAs and letters to do in the meantime. Something to think about.

[davey77]

In reference to cutting up cards:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/amex/184309-davey-amex.html#post1992490

 

[ihpj]

In reference to cutting up cards:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/amex/184309-davey-amex.html#post1992490

 

 

Love that picture

[ihpj]

If you are 'happy' with the way it's going and can sit back and see what happens next them all well and good.

 

Remember the FOS will not back you up concerning the supply of a credit agreement and their 'opinions' may prove to have annoying consequences. (See my Cap1 thread for the kind of response you will get.)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/171391-davey77-capital-one.html

 

The way I see it, is that if they want me to pay up, they have to chase me. They can send whatever threat-o-gram they like, I will reply in kind. Because they wont take me to Court, things wont go anywhere.

 

For now at least, I shall sit and wait and prepare for the DCAs - file everything, back up and copy all correspondence and go from there. I am only months in to this 'fight' - long way to go.

 

As for the FoS/OFT/TS - they are all toothless and useless institutions set up to give the pretence of consumer protection. Look at the FSA and the Banking crisis we are facing...totally useless. Bottom line: they want money from me, they can take me to Court - but we know that is not going to happen as they must know, we/I know that they don't have the required documentation So what are they actually going to do?

 

No, I remain confident that I can meet any challenge they throw down with the help of the CAG.

Edited March 24, 2009 by ihpj
Typos!

[texanbar]

Good for you!

 

You have my 'virtual' support - this will be one exciting journey!

 

x:-)x

[proudtobegerman]

hello. Just further to your points. I've sent my CCA request to natwest and triton who they passed my account to. Heard nothing. 12 days up tomorrow. Do I just sit tight ????

[ihpj]

** URGENT **

 

I have received a Default Notice from another Lender I am in dispute with, could The Gurus PLEASE take a look at my thread here:

 

ihpj vs. HFC (CCA Request) - My Contribution

 

...and lend any assisatnce? Thank You!

[ihpj]

I have been some of my own research into this and came across the following - that I hope I can share without penalty as they serve to answer my own questions - that I hope will be to the benefit of others too:

 

http://www.penaltychargesforum.co.uk/showthread.php?p=402159

http://www.studentlawjournal.com/articles/2007/consumer/ccdfn07.htm

[ihpj]

** UPDATE / ACTION **

 

Look what the Postman brought me today :

 

http://www.frontiers.plus.com/natwest_dca_triton.jpg

 

...looks like Natwest are getting serious I think a suitably worded reply is needed to Craptron.

[ihpj]

** ADVICE **

 

I am thinking of sending the following reply to Craptron as I don't really want to get into a ping-pong match with them and want to kick them into touch ASAP. I know that Natwest will no doubt move to another DCA and they too will get the same response.

 

I am of the opinnion that I must be robust and strong in my response to any DCA and want to screw and shut them down from the off. I have cobbled together the following from various threads on the forum:

 

 

----------

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE

ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

RE: Your Client Natwest Bank

 

I write with regards to your letter dated , the contents of which have been read and noted.

 

I am somewhat bemused by your involvement as your client has failed to comply with my lawful request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 s.77 to s.79 (inclusive). This request was made in writing on Friday 14 November 2008 and confirmed received by them. Natwest are well aware of their default in relation to this request, and have been for some quite time. They have continually failed to provide any cogent evidence in support of their right to enforce payment and therefore I can only assume they have simply failed to inform you of the full facts.

 

Consequently as this dispute remains unresolved and it is they who are in breach, I advise you to consider the Office of Fair Trading Collections Guidelines s(2)( 8 ), in particular:

 

i. failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued.

k. not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt.

 

Furthermore, their behaviour gives me cause for concern because they have also failed to establish that the alleged Consumer Credit Agreement was even contractually assignable in the first place and as such, would be unable to act as assignee of such an account anyway. Since Natwest have been unable to provide me with a copy of the said agreement, I can only conclude that none exists.

 

I strongly urge to you to liaise with your client before continuing to pursue payments on a disputed [and unlawfully assigned] account. As such, I will expect you will cease all collection activity with immediate effect. And whilst Natwest remain in breach the alleged debt and remains unenforceable. As there is no agreement between us, you also do not have permission to continue to contact me regarding this account, either by post or by personal contact, be that by telephone or visits to my property. In fact, Office of Fair Trading rules and regulations clearly state that you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment; and I have no wish to make an appointment with you. There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc. (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives, to visit me at my property and if you persist in sending Doorstep Callers to my home, you will be reported for harassment and be liable for damages for a tort of trespass.

 

You would also be liable for conspiring in a tort of trespass by acting in defiance of my instructions and sending someone to visit me nevertheless. Should it be necessary, I will obtain an injunction from the Court.

 

I also deem any further collection activity, of any nature that involves contacting me in relation to this account, an act of personal harassment, for the reasons outlined in this letter. Kindly ensure that your system is updated to reflect this, as I will bring any further letters or phone calls to the attention of the Police, to whom I will make a formal statement regarding your conduct given I have already warned you your behaviour causes me to feel harassed.

 

Failure to do so will result in my ignoring any further letters from you and the actions outlined herein being taken in complaint against you. I will not correspond further with you regarding this issue unless you can fully substantiate your claim as I have outlined.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

[Printed Name]

 

----------

 

As ever, comments invited!

Edited October 13, 2009 by ihpj
Layout.

[davey77]

Yeah looks good to me.. i'm sure it will be ignored but ignoring them should make them give up and pass it on at some point. I've dealt with Triton in the past and they give a quick flurry of letters then go quiet in my experience.

 

"As such, I demand you cease all collection activity with immediate effect, as whilst NatWest remain in breach of my request for documentation the alleged debt remains unenforceable."

[ihpj]

Thanks for the amendment Davey77. Slightly revised version posted 1st Class Recorded today - I wonder what they'll say

[ihpj]

I also found this as posted by another contributor (The Shadow) that I think will be of use to others faced dealing with Default Notices:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/barclaycard/165376-barclaycard-m-stanley-no-4.html#post2026443

 

...and s/he basically cites the following extract from 'Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983':

 

(5) Where any statement is required to be in a form specified in a Schedule to these Regulations and is reproduced in the notice, then apart from any heading to the notice, trade names or names of parties to the agreement--

(a) the lettering in the statement shall be afforded more prominence (whether by capital letters, underlining, large or bold print or otherwise) than any other lettering in the notice; and

(b) where words are both shown in capital letters and underlined in any statement specified in a Schedule to these Regulations, they shall be afforded yet more prominence.

Edited April 6, 2009 by ihpj
Formatting of text.

[ihpj]

** ADVICE **

 

I believe firmly that my Natwest (and HFC) DN is defective due to them giving me

 

The Shadow has already kindly commented on the prescribed format of the wording for the HFC DN - and suggests it is incorrect because the words underlined should be in bold to distinguish from the rest of the text - as per the definition above. Checking my Natwest DN and note the wording they have used is exactly the same as HFCs - the words underlined should be in bold - thus, by my understanding, my DNs are defective doubly so.

 

Comments invited!

[davey77]

The consensus is, if you have a dodgy DN then keep it up your sleeve as a defence to any Court action they may bring at a later date.

[ihpj]

The consensus is, if you have a dodgy DN then keep it up your sleeve as a defence to any Court action they may bring at a later date.

 

Oh I quite agree! It just helps if there is 'more' wrong with it

 

I am learning everyday - and you really would have thought these people would have a better understanding of requirements and 'get it right' - THANK GOD these people are incompetent

[proudtobegerman]

Hello everyone ! I've been reading this thread and virtually everything with great interest ! I have been taking the CCA route with NAT WEST and on Saturday morning received what they think is my original credit agreement. What they have sent is an A4 size piece of paper with my name, address and date of birth, headed 'online application'. Attached to this was a generic set of terms and conditons. No prescribed terms just general terms and conditions. What sort of letter would people think I should send back ??? A company called TRITON phoned me today and a very very short rude lady told me they would get an attachment order against my house and then with further court orders they would get the court to force me into selling my house !! Can they do this ?? I explained briefly what I have put above but they said it makes no difference to the overall debt !!! Is this true ??? having read this site from almost page to page I think they are wrong !!! Help ?!?!?!?!