CCA received - enforceable? First one - help please!

[exchange]

Thanks dd and lilly white. You really would think that someone would wake up to such blindingly obvious mistakes though, wouldn't you!

[diddydicky]

Thanks dd and lilly white. You really would think that someone would wake up to such blindingly obvious mistakes though, wouldn't you!

 

yes. but hopefully not any time soon :D

[exchange]

Received a response to my last letter today.

 

They state 'The agreement is a single document in more than one piece.'

 

What are they on?

 

They then say 'However, even if this were not so,.....'.

 

The rubbish they come out with is consistently ridiculous.

 

I have also had a letter from Collect Direct written by someone who needs to go back to school for English grammar lessons. Example - 'You was also advised at that time....', I kid you not!!

 

At least Collect Direct have noticed they need to pay more than 2nd class postage to a foreign address. Still 7 days to respond from the 28 October is a bit tricky.

 

It starts with 'Without Prejudice', any significance to this?

 

They also suggest if I believe the agreement is unenforceable 'you need to try and fight your case through the courts'.

 

I think I prefer M&S to attempt something through the courts.

[cerberusalert]

It starts with 'Without Prejudice', any significance to this?

They claim that the letter cannot be used in evidence without their permission.

[exchange]

Lightning response as always, thanks cerberusalert for making that clear.

[exchange]

The invitation to fight this through the courts is interesting, in that I, being outside the UK, can take action through the English court system against M&S, (in fact I have just had to to get some money back from someone using MCOL which successfully concluded recently), but M&S cannot use the English court system to take action against me. Do you think they are deliberately trying to provoke me into action, which will potentially mean costs for me and an opportunity for them to win in court against me, or am I being paranoid?

[lilly white]

142.—(1) Where under any provision of this Act a thing can be done by a creditor or

owner on an enforcement order only, and either—

(a) the court dismisses (except on technical grounds only) an application for an

enforcement order, or

(b) where no such application has been made or such an application has been

dismissed on technical grounds only, an interested party applies to the court for

a declaration under this subsection

the court may if it thinks just make a declaration that the creditor or owner is not

entitled to do that thing, and thereafter no application for an enforcement order in

respect of it shall be entertained.

 

 

i do belive they are talking about this part of the act.

[exchange]

Thanks lilly white. I just wondered if they were trying to draw me in to taking action because it is difficult for them to initiate legal action when I am not in the UK. That way they get me into the English legal system where they can try to win, if you follow me!

[diddydicky]

Received a response to my last letter today.

 

They state 'The agreement is a single document in more than one piece.'

 

What are they on?

 

They then say 'However, even if this were not so,.....'.

 

The rubbish they come out with is consistently ridiculous.

 

I have also had a letter from Collect Direct written by someone who needs to go back to school for English grammar lessons. Example - 'You was also advised at that time....', I kid you not!!

 

At least Collect Direct have noticed they need to pay more than 2nd class postage to a foreign address. Still 7 days to respond from the 28 October is a bit tricky.

 

It starts with 'Without Prejudice', any significance to this?

 

They also suggest if I believe the agreement is unenforceable 'you need to try and fight your case through the courts'.

 

I think I prefer M&S to attempt something through the courts.

 

dear sirs

 

i am aphalled by the standerd of letta writin from your staf,

i suggest you get someone to write to me who went to a school like wot i did and lernt to write proper like wot i did, init

[exchange]

Hi dd, the spelling was OK, so they know how to use spellcheck at least!

 

I still feel like they are trying to draw me in to taking action because they won't.

[exchange]

Heard nothing from CDUK or M&S since sending a sarcastic letter at the end of October 2009.

[exchange]

Statute barred clock ticking here!

[exchange]

Typical! After posting on another thread that all was quiet a letter from Apex CML turned up this morning asking for full payment. No NOA so I take it Apex are not daft enough to buy the debt.

This is since the last contact with CDUK in October last year! It's taken them time to find someone else to irritate me.

I suppose I could reply to tell them unenforceable agreement, account in dispute, etc, but then again I could just ignore them too.

[exchange]

Something they put at the end that amused me, 'To stop this matter becoming unmanageable.......'. For who? Me, Apex or M&S?

Edited May 11, 2010 by exchange
typo

[exchange]

Identical letter received again today from Apex dated 4 days later.

 

Clever that they are sending them to a foreign address, putting postage paid second class at 25p (??!) presumably through a franking machine and asking for a reply within 5 days. A bit tricky if they take a minimum of 11 days to get here!

 

Ignore or reply?

Edited May 17, 2010 by exchange

[exchange]

Should I reply or is it not worth wasting ink and paper on these idiots?

[cerberusalert]

Ignore for now.

[exchange]

Thanks cerberusalert. Always nice to know someone is looking in. Hello guest!

[lilly white]

As advised ignore..........

 

lilly

[exchange]

Thanks for confirming lilly.

[exchange]

Yet another letter from Apex today but slightly more threatening. Dated 13 May and demanding a response within 72 hours. What are they on!

[exchange]

Just been checking up on Apex CML. On Companies House register it seems there accounts are overdue by 15 days. Not a good sign for a company demanding money. Perhaps they'll go out of business and my money (if I could pay anything!) would not go where it should.

Secondly, a search of the OFT register shows nothing for Apex. They do not have a Consumer Credit Licence?

Now I'm confused because to deal with debt 'advice' is this not compulsory??

[exchange]

Anyone know if Apex can demand money from me without a CCL?

[exchange]

Had a chance to look at other threads and can see that Apex are not daft enough to buy bad debt but collect on behalf of the sharks (I mean banks!). Perhaps they can get away without having a CCL this way?

[exchange]

vint1954 came up with the answer on another thread. Appears that DCA's should hold a valid CCL so interesting if they don't.

I will be writing to Apex to ask them for their CCL number.