Suspect I have no loan agrrement

[maybelline]

thanks for all your support, it really does help:)

[maybelline]

I have now worked out my penalty charges for failed DD's as approx £500 (!) but have decided I will need to address the missold MIG seperately as I cannot work out the information from that provided, also, I still feel the contract is verging on unlawful since, I was offered further credit to clear arrears which is an offence according to OFT guidlelines, I was bullied into the original contract for the car, the guidelines on unfair practice were continously breached, keeping and storing data, home visits etc.

 

can I tackle these issues as two seperate claims, or will this be considered vexatious by the courts?

[Peterbard]

HI

Go for the penalties you already worked out following the methods described here. An idea to start your own thread .

Dont worry about Vexatious litigation it won't applyto you here is a definition to put your mind at rest.

 

vexatious litigation

n. filing a lawsuit with the knowledge that it has no legal basis, with its purpose to bother, annoy, embarrass and cause legal expenses to the defendant. Vexatious litigation includes continuing a lawsuit after discovery of the facts shows it has absolutely no merit

 

I don't knw if i aked this before but was your insurance part of a multiple agreement IE onthe same document or was it sepperate .Also was the insurance financed by credit and did yousign a sepperate agreement for that if so you should have been given the option of paying it of as lump sum in advance and avoiding interest.

 

Keep going you are doing great

 

Peter

[maybelline]

Hi, I do have a thread called surprisingly 'welcome finance' yes the insurance was just added after the fees were added, it was all the same company, no seperate documents to sign. I hate to sound like an idiot but anyway, the fee appears at the start and then when it is settled by the new loan there is a partial refund of it but then it appears again at the start of the new agreement and so on, these look like new loan, new fee, new insurance? so i am borrowing to pay off the old insurance but have a new one also?

[Peterbard]

HI

 

If the insurance was paid for by a sepperate credit agreenet then the document you signed should have had twio signature boxes abd as far as the law is concerned they are two sepperate agreements.

This would explain the rebate as the loan you took out to pay for the premiums would have been pid to the insurer in full at the start.

You would have then paid off the repayments on tha tloan as part of your repayments on your main loan.

 

So you can persue the insurance at a latter date.

I would get the ball rolling on your penalty claim first and get them worrying.

 

PS

I did a voluntarry termination with Werlcome it is on here somewhere what a nightmare that was.

 

Peter

 

 

 

if

[maybelline]

HI

 

if

if what?

[Peterbard]

if i had a new bulb i wouldn't keep pressing the wrong keys

 

Peter

[maybelline]

ha ha ha!

[katewoodstock]

Thanks for your help!! I will try it out.

[Acerfan]

Good luck katewoodstock.

Haven't got round to sending mine yet (slap on wrist)

 

Sent letter off on 27/1 which they received on 29/1. I got a standard response saying they're looking into it & will get back to me by 13/2 (even though I gave them 7 days). I was just wondering if anyone has an opinion on when I should contact TS & the OFT? Is it worth waiting to see what they send or should I make a complaint now? No matter what they send, they've still committed a criminal offence.

 

Thanks,

Acerfan

[Acerfan]

Will be ringing TS for sure in the morning:p

 

Today I received a 'certified copy of the original' without signature boxes or the T&Cs that should be on the reverse.

 

However, and this is where it get's juicy - it's the wrong agreement!! It's over a grand less than they say I owe!!! It's the closed account. (Please excuse me while I wipe the tears of mirth from my eyes). I always knew they were incompetent, but this is just ridiculous. I just don't know where to start, except that in a separate letter I also received today, they're trying to charge me for not making a repayment - therefore trying to enforce an agreement they're in default over.

 

I looked forward to responding to this letter till I saw it was a final response letter - guess I'll just have to wait for court?

[nuttybutty]

I'm very keen to see what happens here as some of the things you say sound so similar to mine - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/intelligent-finance/63680-nuttybutty-intelligent-finance.html

 

Not entirely sure where I stand with my story, but guess we all feel like that at the start.

 

Good luck with taking your complaint further forward.

[joneshousehold]

Nice story Acerfan. Like you said elsewhere their incompetence is hilarious!

[Acerfan]

Just had a very nice letter saying they've overcharged me interest & will be refunding it to my account.

 

How many glaring errors have they made now?... I've lost count!!!

[Acerfan]

Just a thought - I wonder if they've realised (finally) that they were in default (despite me telling them so) & this is a refund of the interest since they defaulted? So far they've also not taken the charge they told me they'd be debitting for non-payment of the last installment.

 

Am just about to write back to them about their hillarious response to my CCA request

[maybelline]

I have rec'd a copy agreement signed but the agreement number does not correlate with the account number on the letter from same sayinge we enclose copy of agreement number XXXXXXXXX. also says, due to the delay in submitting a copy of the legal agreement for account number, XXXXXXX, another totally different number?? ... we can give the relevant details, value XXX, opened onXXXX for XXXXX, stating it was for a three year term including Credit Protection Insurance - now what on earth does it relate to as the copy agreement attahced does not have Credit Protection Insurance (what is this anyway, PPI??)??

 

also rec'd LBA from capquest which does not state an agreement number or account number but threatens court action in four days.

[Fullyskinted]

OK, question time. I have two CCs that will run out of the 2 + 12 + 30 day period for CCa request early next week.... One of which has now informed me (in writing) twice it cannot recover the signed agreement from its archives...

 

Has anyone got a 'nice' letter I can send them informing them of their errors and my next move?

[Acerfan]

Sorry Fullyskinted, they haven't admitted as much to me yet, so haven't drafted a letter. However, PM me your email address & I'll see what I can do

[Acerfan]

Right, so they've sent me a copy finally, & I did sign it:rolleyes: but they failed to send me documentation under sections 63 and 64 when the loan was started. I have to check & see if all the T&Cs and prescribed terms are there, but it looks like they are. Does anyone have any ideas of a next step? As far as section 77 goes, the loan is now enforceable, but has anyone got any ideas in relation to the ss63/64 issues please?

 

Am up to my neck in it at the moment, so any help would be great

[Acerfan]

Sorry to have been away so long folks - have had manic times here!!!

 

Sent of a SAR in March to try to find out if they sent me a copy of the agreement when I opened the account & got generic letter back saying I needed to provide account number, sort code etc. I had done in my SAR, but the copy of my letter they sent back to me was a separate letter (sort of covering letter) about some issues which I'd enclosed with the SAR. Do you think they're trying to buy time? The 40 days will be up before the end of the month, (took them about a month to respond), but I was going to send back a further copy of my original SAR. Would it be non-compliance if they haven't cashed my cheque (on the back of which were my account number & sort code)? Would the SAR be dated from the receipt of the original back in March?

Any help would be greatly appreciated

[Acerfan]

Received notice of default letters on all my accounts with this bank today (all O/D or loans) - have been witholding payment on loan, but not on other accounts although one has exceeded limit because of their charges!!! Have a limited time to get this sorted or they've threatened court and have emailed TS but not hoping for too much help from them. Can they do this? ie amalgamate all debts into one because of dispute/non payment on one account? Do I have a case by saying I need the info from SAR to confirm if they've complied? I had a feeling they were stalling for time with the SAR trick, but how do I turn this around?

[Acerfan]

Bump

[joneshousehold]

Hi, Acerfan. Sorry I don't know the answer to your question about amalgamating loans etc but hopefully someone else will come along and give you a definitive answer.

However what I can say is that if they have not complied with your S77 request they cannot issue a default notice. I would be inclined to write back, point out they are in default and tell them the notice is invalid. You could also point out the other credit agreements are being maintained and that so far they have failed to show you an agreement with full T&C's that allows them to amalgamate. Make them prove to you that they could (if they weren't in default) do this. The more you get them to do the more evidence you will accumulate.

Good to see you are still in with the fight

[Acerfan]

Hi joneshousehold and thanks for that - yes definitely still in the fight, just been a little distracted by illnesses in the family.

 

The problem is that they have complied with my s77 request (albeit outside the timescale). I'm now trying to verify that they complied with ss63 and 64 by sending off SAR, but think they're stalling for more time. I think the reason they've sent me a default notice on one of the other accounts is cos they keep adding charges to this account every time the loan payment isn't made, so have taken me over the overdraft limit. The third account however is all in order (not over limit & interest being covered every month). Sorry to confuse, but they've not actually amalgamated all debts into one, but they're treating all the accounts as if I've defaulted because of the issues with one of my accounts.

 

I have contacted TS but don't have much hope of a rapid response, so might have to give them a ring to try to chivy them along a bit. I am due to respond to the last of their letters, but really need something solid to back me up as I don't want to be defaulted or taken to court.

[joneshousehold]

Sorry to hear about the illness. Hope things are better now.

 

You know me I like to adopt a stance and make them prove I'm wrong. I would take the view that they HAVE breached S63 & S64 and tell them that they know the amount is still in dispute so they cannot issue a default notice. I tend to quote the OFT guidelines on debt recover (which I think you have) and list all the ones that I can match no matter how tenuously. My favourites are

 

·ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

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

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

·leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors' lack of knowledge

·failing to provide debtors or creditors with information on status of debts, for example, not providing requested balance statements when reasonably requested

·asking or instructing debtors to make contact on premium rate telephone numbers

·Those contacting debtors must not be deceitful by misrepresenting their authority and/or the correct legal position.

·falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when it legally cannot

·Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive.

·contacting debtors at unreasonable times and at unreasonable intervals

·disclosing or threatening to disclose debt details to third parties unless legally entitled to do so

·sending demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question

·passing on debtor details to debt management companies without the debtors' informed prior consent

·misleading debtors into believing they are legally liable to pay collection charges when this is not the case

 

I have just cut and paste these from a letter I sent so some may not apply but you can see what I mean. If you need a link to the OFT document let me know

 

Good luck