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

[the_shadow]

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 ?!?!?!?!

 

Hi proudtobegerman, you've hijacked this thread which is a no..no, you need to post up a new thread with your details and you'll get responses.

I will just say that there is a LOT more involved in getting a house charge than the lady told you and a sale order is not taken lightly by a judge. Please post a new thread and I and others will pitch in.

 

S.

[proudtobegerman]

Really sorry ! Will do ! Thanks !

[proudtobegerman]

Starting my own thread now. Apologies once again ! KD

[ihpj]

** UPDATE **

 

Have heard NOTHING back - no doubt these monkeys and jokers are thinking up something. Will post back regularly to keep this thread up to date. Many thanks for everyones help/contribution/support!

[ihpj]

** UPDATE / ACTION **

 

Looks like I spoke a little too soon! Got this back from Craptron this morning

 

http://www.frontiers.plus.com/natwest_dca_triton_2.jpg

 

Clearly a routine threat-o-gram from them. Question is does it merit/warrant a reply? My thoughts are that I should perhaps send them a little something as follows:

 

----------

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

RE: Your Client Natwest Bank

 

I write with regards to your letter dated 16th inst.

 

I note that you have chosen to ignore my correspondence of Monday 6th April 2009 and deliberately breaching 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.

 

I have, in my previous correspondence, made my position very clear therefore urge you to take that into consideration when reviewing this case and your involvement.

 

YOUR BREACH HAS BEEN REPORTED TO THE OFFICE OF FAIR TRADING. CONTINUED HARASSMENT BY YOU WILL BE REPORTED TO THE POLICE.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

[Printed Name]

 

----------

 

Input invited please!

[davey77]

Yeah looks good. I would be inclined to remind them about the action taken by the OFT against 1st Credit and Mackenzie Hall that i used in a recent letter to a DCA here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland/185332-davey-mint-rbs-2.html#post2119583

 

Then send a complaint about their behaviour and that of the original creditor to the OFT.

[the_shadow]

Yeah looks good. I would be inclined to remind them about the action taken by the OFT against 1st Credit and Mackenzie Hall that i used in a recent letter to a DCA here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/royal-bank-scotland/185332-davey-mint-rbs-2.html#post2119583

 

Then send a complaint about their behaviour and that of the original creditor to the OFT.

 

AND mention in the complaint against triton they request a payment by debit or CREDIT card, another breach of OFT guidelines.

 

S.

[ihpj]

** ADVICE **

 

You guys are absolute GEMS. Advice taken onboard, letter now amended to read as follows:

 

----------

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

RE: Your Client Natwest Bank

 

I write with regards to your letter dated 16th inst and note that you have chosen to ignore my correspondence of Monday 6th April 2009 and deliberately breaching 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.

 

In light of recent action taken by the Office of Fair Trading against companies breaching these guidelines, namely 1st Credit and Mackenzie Hall, it would have been my expectation that you would have been more mindful; especially as you are suggesting I make payment towards an irredeemably unenforceable account by credit card is both inappropriate and yet another example of your breach of their guidance.

 

I have made my position very clear in my correspondence of 6th inst and refer you back to that. If you persist in contacting me with a view of seeking payments then I will not only report you to the Office of Fair Trading but also the Police for harassment.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

[Printed Name]

 

----------

Edited April 24, 2009 by ihpj
Formatting!

[the_shadow]

** ADVICE **

 

You guys are absolute GEMS. Advice taken onboard, letter now amended to read as follows:

 

----------

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

RE: Your Client Natwest Bank

 

I write with regards to your letter dated 16th inst and note that you have chosen to ignore my correspondence of Monday 6th April 2009 and deliberately breaching 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.

 

In light of recent action taken by the Office of Fair Trading against companies breaching these guidelines, namely 1st Credit and Mackenzie Hall, it would have been my expectation that you would have been more mindful; especially as you are suggesting I make payment towards an irredeemably unenforceable account by credit card is both inappropriate and yet another example of your breach of their guidance.

 

I have made my position very clear in my correspondence of 6th inst and refer you back to that. If you persist in contacting me with a view of seeking payments then I will not only report you to the Office of Fair Trading but also the Police for harassment.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

[Printed Name]

 

----------

 

Looks good to me although not sure what month "inst" is:) and you may want to include complaining to trading standards also as they are the keepers of the CCA1974 so to speak:D

 

S.

[ihpj]

Inst is a fancy way of saying 'in or of the present month'. See more here:

 

What does inst mean? definition and meaning (Free English Language Dictionary)

 

I deliberately chose to leave out the complaint to the OFT on THIS occasion so that I left them something to loose if they choose to contact me. On each occasion we have corresponded, I have pointed out their breaches and also given the more than the one warning about their behaviour...so it makes THEM look unreasonable and belligerent.

 

If I report them now, then they may well feel they have nothing left to loose and write to me again (and again). Just my 2p worth...

[the_shadow]

Inst is a fancy way of saying 'in or of the present month'. See more here:

 

What does inst mean? definition and meaning (Free English Language Dictionary)

 

I deliberately chose to leave out the complaint to the OFT on THIS occasion so that I left them something to loose if they choose to contact me. On each occasion we have corresponded, I have pointed out their breaches and also given the more than the one warning about their behaviour...so it makes THEM look unreasonable and belligerent.

 

If I report them now, then they may well feel they have nothing left to loose and write to me again (and again). Just my 2p worth...

 

See you learn something new everyday :D

[ihpj]

** UPDATE / ADVICE **

 

I got the following reply back from Craptron today:

 

http://www.frontiers.plus.com/natwest_dca_triton_3.jpg

 

----------

 

Made for an interesting read. Can't say I am overly surprised by their response, but the fact they actually took time to go 'liaising' with their client and reply personally, makes me feel 'special' Got to love that personal service!

 

Now, anyone have any ideas of a response please? I am thinking of sending something like this:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/126315-btonbadger-natwest-creditcard-cca-3.html#post1775629

Edited May 8, 2009 by ihpj

[ihpj]

** FILE NOTE **

 

Having read through my correspondence log, I see that their letter is dated 30/04 and is in replyto my own of 06/04 (post #75) - clearly they have not yet processed my second letter (post # 90) and no doubt will get a further similar (snotty?) reply from them...although they have given me 7 days to respond; I am now of the opinnion that I need not [replyto them] - am a little confused

[davey77]

My personal view these days is that after you have informed the DCA of the dispute (depending on how strong your argument/agreement is) then after that ignore the swine.

 

I used to think keeping up a papertrail was good and i still do. By all means send that letter in the link if it's appropriate to your issues etc tho.

 

Or.. you could call their bluff and tell them to start Court action:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/halifax-bank-bank-scotland/171374-bank-scotland-terminated-without-19.html#post2148399

[ihpj]

** ADVICE **

 

After browsing the CAG, I have come up with this 'final letter' to the DCAs - which I hope is a mix of 'get lost' and BRING IT!' - comments please:

 

----------

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE

ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

RE: Your Client

 

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

 

I am sure that you are aware that I have long since requested from your Client a signed copy of my Consumer Credit Agreement, under the terms of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (with special regards to s.78 ). To date this request has not been complied with and I have only been furnished with a copy of generic terms and conditions, relating to an unsigned priority application. Whereas I appreciate your client has endeavoured to persuade me that this is in some way sufficient to discharge them from their obligations under the Act, I have highlighted that the mere provision of these documents is not deemed a legally permissible substitute for the true copy of the executed agreement.

 

There is a clear requirement for your client to produce the correct document that is not signed by myself but that also contains the prescribed terms per section 61(a) and section 127(3) of the Act; and I am sure you are aware that when an agreement fails to include the prescribed terms as per section 61(a) of the Act and is signed by the Debtor, then the agreement will be irredeemably unenforceable. In this regard, I refer you to the decision in Wilson v Hurstanger (2007) EWCA Civ 299:

 

"...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 section 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."

 

Accordingly, what I have thus far been supplied is in no way compliant with the Act and therefore, despite protestations to the contrary from both yourself and your client, this matter remains in formal and lawful dispute.

 

Now let me turn to your point threatening legal action and your persistence in pursuing me for this alleged debt. As your client has thus far been able to produce the relevant document, I must conclude that you are in possession because as you are aware Section 127(3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 makes it clear that a signed document containing the prescribed terms is a precursor to enforcement. Therefore I ask you to forward the following without delay:

 

1. A true copy of the executed credit agreement incorporating prescribed notices, terms and conditions applicable at the time the agreement was executed and

 

2. Any further or subsequent notices, terms and conditions relied upon.

 

 

Please note that my request under the Practice Direction is not a request for production within the confines of the Act and Regulations but rather, it is for a copy of the executed agreement, including signatures and all such other notices, terms and conditions as will be relied upon in the event that your client shall begin a claim. Furthermore, a copy of the documents I have requested should be supplied to me within 14 days of receipt of this letter.

 

If however you cannot produce the required information, then your threat of legal action is quite clearly impotent and can only conclude that it was mentioned with a view to cause me nuisance and harassment. This behaviour is reprehensible, especially in light of recent regulatory action taken by the Office of Fair Trading against similar companies as yourself, namely ‘1st Credit’, who have been rebuked for discussing legal action with consumers unless it is likely that such action will be taken.

 

Should you (or your client) ignore this request and choose to commence proceedings, it is very likely that I shall repeat my request for the provision of documents but this time under Civil Procedure Rules s.31(14). In the event that your client should fail to comply with my request, I will not hesitate in making an application to the Court for an Order that further proceedings upon the claim be stayed pending provision of the requisite documents; and in the course of the application I will of course refer to this (and all previous requests) for the provision of copy documents and reserve the right to produce this letter to show that I have made attempts to obtain the information and shall ask the Court to consider this when the issue of cost falls due.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

----------

Edited August 28, 2009 by ihpj

[MARTIN3030]

Who is the Dca you are dealing with ?

[davey77]

Who is the Dca you are dealing with ?

 

I believe it's Triton Credit Services.

[ihpj]

I believe it's Triton Credit Services.

 

You believe correctly! Craptron (Triton) it is ...

[davey77]

Ignore them.. or tell them that you believe this matter should go to Court if they feel it appropriate and that they should begin legal proceedings as soon as possible.

 

You'll probably never hear from them again.

 

Trouble is then you will hear from the next DCA and the one after that. So you should consider the CPR/N1 route if you want this to have a conclusion within a reasonable time frame.

[ihpj]

Hi Davey77! Lovely to have your input on this thread - as ever appreciate your support

 

I know what you are saying about getting a conclusion to this. Right now I am not feeling brave enough go down that route; not sure anyone has been successful by doing this yet?

[davey77]

Here's one:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/165349-smt37-morgan-stanley-goldfish.html

[ihpj]

** ADVICE **

 

Right-O here are my thoughts and would be obliged if I could get input from The Learned Lot on how 'wise' my proposed curse of action is (or is not!):

 

I have my CCA request outstanding with SlapWest. They have sent me general gumph and tried to insist this in some way complies with the requirement. They have then issued a defective DN (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/172280-ihpj-natwest-cards-cca-2.html#post2003531) and followed it up with a formal notice of termination (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/natwest-bank/172280-ihpj-natwest-cards-cca-3.html#post2050263) - and having read the thread entitled 'Tale of a dodgy DN' - I now feel they have really shot themselves in the foot as now with a termination based on a defective DN, they cannot now issue another DN (to rectify the first defective one as the account is for all intents and purposes terminated) and can only seek the amount of arrears on the notice.

 

My thinking is that I should now write to SlapWest highlighting the termination of account is based on a defective DN and this seriously compromises their position in seeking the full amount outstanding; perhaps even take the opportunity to offer up a F&FS offer of monies = arrears amount shown on DN and when they reject it, start down the CPR31.16 route to bing pressure on them...because even if they now produce the CCA, surely as the account is now terminated, it is irrelevant?

[davey77]

The consensus here seems that you should not inform them of a defective DN but keep it up your sleeve should they ever start Court Action then hit them with it.

 

You have to look at things as a Judge would look at it (and you know what they can be like) so unlikely IMO that a Judge would throw the case out based on the fact that a CCA was produced after the account was terminated. He/she would probably see that as a minor error only and not fatal to the Creditors case.

 

I would go down the CPR route as initially it's only a letter after all and you are in control and can take it as far as you want to.

[ihpj]

** UPDATE / ACTION **

 

Got the following threat-o-gram from Craptron this morning :

 

http://www.frontiers.plus.com/natwest_dca_triton_4.jpg

Edited June 11, 2009 by ihpj

[the_shadow]

** UPDATE / ACTION **

 

Got the following threat-o-gram from Craptron this morning :

 

http://www.frontiers.plus.com/natwest_dca_triton_4.jpg

 

 

OOOhh a notice of legal proceedings......albeit with a splattering of "MAY"'s and "COULD"'s

 

That opens up the can of worms for the CPR letters to be sent to obtain copies of everything

 

S.