Cap1 & CCA return

[Guest The Terminator]

Hence why I'm off to the library!

 

I've hit blanks when searching for Goode and for s85 online (using various terms - I can Google pretty well!). I found a mention of s85 in a high court case about a mortgage (where the credit agreement was found to be totally unenforceable because the lender put a number in the wrong place), but the judge said he wasn't looking at that as it didn't matter, and furthermore wasn't up to speed on it so wasn't sure of the implications. The lady was claiming that Lloyds did what we're saying (no signed agreement with new card) with her Access card, as it was called then.

 

But nothing else... so Goode had better have the goods!

 

Do you have a link to that piece of case law it must be old.

[tamadus]

OH something else that has come up in the last couple of days. Apparently a default notice isnt fully binding unless it is served by hand, but I need to cross check this still. But a couple of people independantly have said it so its very possibly true.

 

Ok forget this bit as section 176 covers service of documents and clearly states that posting a document to the last known address is sufficient to be deemed served.

[Guest The Terminator]

Ok forget this bit as section 176 covers service of documents and clearly states that posting a document to the last known address is sufficient to be deemed served.

When I read that I was inclined to mention S196 of the Law of Property Act(1925) but thanks for clarifying it in the Act

[pcr1]

Do you have a link to that piece of case law it must be old.

 

It's about 1987-1991ish.

 

Sorry, I have no idea where it is. I remember the judge starting off by saying it was a very sad case, as a good bank-customer relationship had broken down completely.

 

It was over a second mortgage, and I think it was a possession hearing. The judge noted the PPI amount was in the wrong section ("total charge for credit" or amount advance, one way round or the other) and the agreement was therefore unenforceable. He then touched upon the s85 argument but said because of his judgement it was now irrelevant (I think; whatever he said he was right but it was disappointing it wasn't tried).

 

I think I followed the link from a forum when looking for something else. If I find it I'll post it but I've just had an unsuccessful Google for it.

[tamadus]

It's about 1987-1991ish.

 

Sorry, I have no idea where it is. I remember the judge starting off by saying it was a very sad case, as a good bank-customer relationship had broken down completely.

 

He must be thinking that their are a lot of sad cases now for the same reason.

 

It was over a second mortgage, and I think it was a possession hearing. The judge noted the PPI amount was in the wrong section ("total charge for credit" or amount advance, one way round or the other) and the agreement was therefore unenforceable. He then touched upon the s85 argument but said because of his judgement it was now irrelevant (I think; whatever he said he was right but it was disappointing it wasn't tried).

 

Why on earth dont they include extra things like this in their judgement to save it having to be gone over at some future date.

 

I think I followed the link from a forum when looking for something else. If I find it I'll post it but I've just had an unsuccessful Google for it.

 

 

If

[tamadus]

It's about 1987-1991ish.

 

Sorry, I have no idea where it is. I remember the judge starting off by saying it was a very sad case, as a good bank-customer relationship had broken down completely.

 

He must be thinking that their are a lot of sad cases now for the same reason.

 

It was over a second mortgage, and I think it was a possession hearing. The judge noted the PPI amount was in the wrong section ("total charge for credit" or amount advance, one way round or the other) and the agreement was therefore unenforceable. He then touched upon the s85 argument but said because of his judgement it was now irrelevant (I think; whatever he said he was right but it was disappointing it wasn't tried).

 

Why on earth dont they include extra things like this in their judgement to save it having to be gone over at some future date.

 

I think I followed the link from a forum when looking for something else. If I find it I'll post it but I've just had an unsuccessful Google for it.

 

 

If PPI was included in the Total Charge for Credit then it would make the agreement unenforceable as a case somebody highlighted to me recently showed.

[Guest The Terminator]

It's about 1987-1991ish.

 

Sorry, I have no idea where it is. I remember the judge starting off by saying it was a very sad case, as a good bank-customer relationship had broken down completely.

 

It was over a second mortgage, and I think it was a possession hearing. The judge noted the PPI amount was in the wrong section ("total charge for credit" or amount advance, one way round or the other) and the agreement was therefore unenforceable. He then touched upon the s85 argument but said because of his judgement it was now irrelevant (I think; whatever he said he was right but it was disappointing it wasn't tried).

 

I think I followed the link from a forum when looking for something else. If I find it I'll post it but I've just had an unsuccessful Google for it.

 

There are two recent cases involving Paragon Finance and one from last year I think it was London Securities vs Meadows.I've read all three transcripts but there is no mention of S85 but alot about credit agreements.Link is in a previous post.

[dollies01]

I have just had another letter demanding payment from Lowell finance, I have got on my high horse, to type a caustic letter back to them and pulled out the copy of application form they sent me,.............Feel a bit stupid to have only just noticed that there is in fact a box with my signature on it marked credit agreement.

I didn't realise at the time, nor when it was returned to me, but then why would I?!

it was five years ago, and I hadnt been issued with a card ever before and hadnt held up much hope of my application being successful.

Obviously this doesnt excuse me from anything.

My question now is

Have Lowell finance complied with my cca request?

[tamadus]

I have just had another letter demanding payment from Lowell finance, I have got on my high horse, to type a caustic letter back to them and pulled out the copy of application form they sent me,.............Feel a bit stupid to have only just noticed that there is in fact a box with my signature on it marked credit agreement.

I didn't realise at the time, nor when it was returned to me, but then why would I?!

it was five years ago, and I hadnt been issued with a card ever before and hadnt held up much hope of my application being successful.

Obviously this doesnt excuse me from anything.

My question now is

Have Lowell finance complied with my cca request?

 

Dollies, Please look and make sure the wording is as follows. Credit Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I am guessing as I have not seen the paperwork but it sound like they may have complied.

 

This is part of the problem with credit cards now that we have all become so blase about them we rarely bother checking the agreement or our statements, we seem to assume that we have the card so the statement is correct. We never realise that something is wrong until it's too late.

 

I have just found a purchase at Birmingham airport on my bank statement, ok I was there on that day and card is still in my possesion but I honestly cannot recall buying anything apart from a news paper and a coffee, yet I spent £23 so I need to double check that transaction this evening with them. I also can't find the sales receipt for it:-o

 

It's possible you might have to eat humble pie and resort to simply reclaiming any charges

[Guest The Terminator]

Tamadus is correct it must refer to the Consumer Credit Act(1974) in the wording he has posted.My only thought here is that was there a"cooling off" period on the agreement.If not it will not comply with the act.Perhaps you can give us some more info then we may be able to better advise

[tamadus]

I'm guessing I know the box terminator and the cooling off section will be there if it is the box I think it is

[dollies01]

Thanks for your replies.

The credit act 1974 is mentioned

Also

Once you have signed this agreement you will have for a short time a right to cancel it . exact details and when you can do this will be sent to you by post by capital one.

So Looks like Im doomed! However I am going to now send Capital one a S.A.R

after all I have a balance of nearly £600 and the card limit was only £200

[tamadus]

Thanks for your replies.

The credit act 1974 is mentioned

 

Also

 

Once you have signed this agreement you will have for a short time a right to cancel it . exact details and when you can do this will be sent to you by post by capital one.

 

 

So Looks like Im doomed! However I am going to now send Capital one a S.A.R

after all I have a balance of nearly £600 and the card limit was only £200

 

Get that SAR in the post first thing in the morning dollies and go get them

[Guest The Terminator]

Just been going through the CCA and MBUSA's T&C.Now that the charges have been made unlawful this would effectivly make all CC agreements null and void especally if the charges are stated in the T&C.Looking through one of my law books I came across this

 

Unenforceable contracts

An unenforceable contract is a valid contract but it cannot be enforced in the courts if one of the parties refuses to carry out its terms. Items received under the contract cannot generally be reclaimed.

 

The reason I've brought this up is because im looking at all angles before I draft my default notice under S85 to MBUSA and Humpty Dumpty. Any comments welcome.

[tamadus]

Just been going through the CCA and MBUSA's T&C.Now that the charges have been made unlawful this would effectivly make all CC agreements null and void especally if the charges are stated in the T&C.Looking through one of my law books I came across this

 

Unenforceable contracts

An unenforceable contract is a valid contract but it cannot be enforced in the courts if one of the parties refuses to carry out its terms. Items received under the contract cannot generally be reclaimed.

 

The reason I've brought this up is because im looking at all angles before I draft my default notice under S85 to MBUSA and Humpty Dumpty. Any comments welcome.

 

 

Hmmmm interesting find. I actually thought that the charges (which are included in T&C's) would make the contract unlawful but pcr1 in post #40 pointed out that a judge can order the terms to be changed and the contract would still be valid. I am sure that simply refusing to accept one of the terms can't make the agreement unenforceable, otherwise they wouldn't be able to persue payment on it. I assume that bit about items recieved applies both ways.

 

Let me think this through over a good nights sleep please it's midnight again and I need my bed:)

 

Oh and when you draft those default notices we need to make sure they follow the CCA accurately.

[pcr1]

Oh and when you draft those default notices we need to make sure they follow the CCA accurately.

 

There is no need to send a default notice; they are automatically in default.

 

You can send a letter politely advising them, but this does not have to follow any prescribed format whatsoever.

[Guest The Terminator]

That's good news pcr1.How is the reaserch going.

[pcr1]

That's good news pcr1.How is the reaserch going.

 

Unfortunately I couldn't manage it today, but I'll definitely be sorting it tomorrow.

[Guest The Terminator]

I received a phone call this afternoon from a DCA acting on behalf of Humptey Dumptey.The conversation went like this:

 

DCA:Hello can I speak to Mr Terminator.

 

Terminator: No

 

DCA: Why.

 

Terminator: Because you haven't introduced yourself

 

DCA: We act for Humptey Dumptey regarding your account which is x pounds and we can take payment by Debit Card.

 

Terminator: You won't be taking anything from my account because 1) I do not acknowledge you as a creditor.2) If you were instructed by HD they are in breach of the DPA because they have not had my permission to give you my personal details and you are also in breach of the Act as well.

 

DCA: But Mr Terminator its in your T&C we can ring you when we want.

 

Terminator: No you can't and I am under no obligation to speak to you.

 

DCA: But you are in breach of your terms and conditions.

 

Terminator: Before we start talking about who is in breach of there T&C you may well find that HD is in breach of their terms and conditions I dont acknowledge any debt and it can't be enforced.I tell you what let's take it to court and let a judge decide.

 

DCA:I don't think that is a good road to go down.

 

Terminator: Why.Is it due to the fact that you haven't got a leg to stand on.

 

DCA:Come on Mr Terminator you know that banks and CC companies don't like going to court.

 

Terminator:Yes because everyone knows there theives.Wouldnt you agree.

 

DCA:I can't comment on that.What I will do is contact HD tell them that you are in dispute and they will have to resolve it with you.

 

Terminator:So if I don't hear from them in the next 7 days I will then start legal proceedings.

 

DCA:That is up to you Mr Terminator we know that they don't comply with the cca and it is only a matter of time before someone takes them to the cleaners.Thank you for your time and have a good afternoon.

 

At no time did I mention S85 but i'm a little suspecious about this conversation because one of my collegues is in the same position.I'm just wondering if they know about S85 and are on a knife edge to when this can of worms get's well and truly opened.

[tamadus]

;)Wow I wish you had recorded the call. If he used the words you have that could have been dynamite. For a DCA to admit these companies don't comply with the CCA is unreal.

 

I think your probably right Terminator they certainly should know about s85 but why haven't they got their act together and complied with it ? I wonder if he was implying more that the account had been passeds to a DCA when in dispute?

 

I want to know who told him you know banks and CC companies don't like going to court? The reason of course is they always lose lol

 

I bet after that call you had a wonderful afternoon:D

 

Barclaycard and Lloyds TSB have until Thursday to produce the much desired signed copy of the agreement under s78(1) so the next week could be very interesting.

 

I have a feeling they are going to try stalling as much as possible and will be determined to make it a bumpy ride. Time to fasten our seatbelts methinks:D

[Ally]

Guy's

 

this is a very adictive quest I love it, Im not sure if it will help my many problems, but im hooked

 

well done keep going Ally

[tamadus]

Guy's

 

this is a very adictive quest I love it, Im not sure if it will help my many problems, but im hooked

 

well done keep going Ally

 

Keep watching this space Ally:p

 

If you want to PM me about some of your problems we may be able to help. Otherwise start a new thread and ask for help from the rest of the forum.

[Guest The Terminator]

;)Wow I wish you had recorded the call. If he used the words you have that could have been dynamite. For a DCA to admit these companies don't comply with the CCA is unreal.

 

I think your probably right Terminator they certainly should know about s85 but why haven't they got their act together and complied with it ? I wonder if he was implying more that the account had been passeds to a DCA when in dispute?

 

I want to know who told him you know banks and CC companies don't like going to court? The reason of course is they always lose lol

 

I bet after that call you had a wonderful afternoon:D

 

Barclaycard and Lloyds TSB have until Thursday to produce the much desired signed copy of the agreement under s78(1) so the next week could be very interesting.

 

I have a feeling they are going to try stalling as much as possible and will be determined to make it a bumpy ride. Time to fasten our seatbelts methinks:D

 

I wish I had recorded it but not all is lost.It was witnessed by a collegue because I had the mobile on speaker phone and he was shocked because he has just had a couple of knock backs from Crapital One.I'm just wondering what the reaction would be if all of a sudden the CC providers got hit with a string of default notices although our researcher has already posted that they are automatically in default.Another interesting development today was another of my collegues brought in his replacement A&L card and guess what a straightforward breach of S85 new card,terms and conditions but missing the most important thing.

[tamadus]

I wish I had recorded it but not all is lost.It was witnessed by a collegue because I had the mobile on speaker phone and he was shocked because he has just had a couple of knock backs from Crapital One.I'm just wondering what the reaction would be if all of a sudden the CC providers got hit with a string of default notices although our researcher has already posted that they are automatically in default.Another interesting development today was another of my collegues brought in his replacement A&L card and guess what a straightforward breach of S85 new card,terms and conditions but missing the most important thing.

 

OMG no way? even though they must know we are onto this ( they monitor the threads) Definitely no section covering the CCA ?

 

I was hoping that somehow we could register their default status, it would be interesting to have a company do a credit check and find Humpty is in default to you lmao.

 

I'm looking forward to hitting Crapital One again as I have accepted their settlement offer but told them in no uncertain terms the credit has to affect my payment history. If nothing else £50 of it is court fees and is new money into the equation. I also told them to remove the default notice and if they dont comply with both points I will issue proceedings to ask a judge to order it.

 

Hey do you have an address for Humpty please I am about to send an SAR and can't be bothered to log onto their site lol. Also printing out all Statements for smile to ask them nicely to refund me

 

Can't wait till Thursday when Lloyds TSB and Barclaycard officially become criminals

[Guest The Terminator]

OMG no way? even though they must know we are onto this ( they monitor the threads) Definitely no section covering the CCA ?

 

I was hoping that somehow we could register their default status, it would be interesting to have a company do a credit check and find Humpty is in default to you lmao.

 

I'm looking forward to hitting Crapital One again as I have accepted their settlement offer but told them in no uncertain terms the credit has to affect my payment history. If nothing else £50 of it is court fees and is new money into the equation. I also told them to remove the default notice and if they dont comply with both points I will issue proceedings to ask a judge to order it.

 

Hey do you have an address for Humpty please I am about to send an S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) and can't be bothered to log onto their site lol. Also printing out all Statements for smile to ask them nicely to refund me

 

Can't wait till Thursday when Lloyds TSB and Barclaycard officially become criminals

 

I haven't got the address at hand but if you go to New Egg Home you should get the address by the way they are sticking up their interest rates yet again that's about 3 in as many months.I think it's the Pride Park address your looking for under contact us.