Capquest chasing 2nd Cap1 card debt

[Desperate Daniella]

Hi DD can you please, on your own time, supply me your sharp letter. I will send that off and go quite until I hear from them about F&F offer or letter before claim.

 

It's the one at post 58 which I will amend a bit.

 

They have muddled up what they sent you which is good.

[fletch70]

My pleasure...anytime , although, and you may be shocked to hear this, I am not always right :-o

[fletch70]

Just for another laugh, I have an email from Wets who refer to the Credit consumer act 1974 . I asked them for a copy and guess what

 

This is a real email

Further to your recent email regarding your account.

 

I acknowledge your comments and would like to confirm that Wescot always attempt to respond with an explanation or resolution as quickly as possible.

 

 

 

The Credit Consumer Act of 1974 is not applicable on this account as the balance outstanding relates to a current account. Therefore, there is no signed credit agreement on the account and our records show that statements relating to the balance have been sent to you.

 

 

 

I trust the above answers your query and I apologise you had to contact us again to confirm the details.

 

my reply

 

I am alarmed that you are unable or unwilling to understand either my letters or the relevant legislation.

I again refer you to all my previous communication.

Until you can comply with my lawful requests or evidence that you have done (other than our clients say) I will no longer communicate with you in any way.

 

Finally I have to point out the ineptitude of your staff where they refer to the credit consumer act 1974. Please provide me with a copy of such an act

[Desperate Daniella]

That was really funny, fletch.

 

Rayn,

 

Are there any dates on those two agreements - original and defaulted? I wondered if there was anything under the tippex? ?

 

I just don't get the terminology here. Usually they send an original and the current T&Cs. Are they saying the Defaulted agreement is the current one?

 

DD

[Rayn2036]

Hi DD, there are no reference to date what so ever on either of the T&Cs. Account was defaulted in 2003 and they have sent me the T&Cs during that period. They are not saying defaulted one is the current one. Current T&Cs would be vastly different I guess.

[fletch70]

If the agreement was defaulted then defaulted T&C's are correct or so I believe. They do not need to send current ones as well.

 

Assuming default goes to termination then there is now no agreement as such to have terms for

[Desperate Daniella]

I need to check some dates and charges and will have to look through some old Capital One threads. This may take a day or two.

 

Don't panic. They haven't given a time for when they expect to hear from you and a week will be fine.

[Rayn2036]

Thanks DD.

 

Please see attached compound interest spreadsheet. Total claim will be more than the actual debt CQ is chasing. I will keep it until they push it through the court.

[Desperate Daniella]

Wow!

[Rayn2036]

Panic Panic!!!

received letter from their legal team.

 

I have already replied them on 22/01/2014 but the letter says I failed to respond.

 

Can some one please ( DX, Brig, DD, Fletch or anyone) have a quick look and advice accordingly.

 

Is this their usual crap or should I be prepared?

 

I do not want to go anywhere near court.

 

Should I reply yo HL legal or should I stay quite.

 

Please help....

[SWLABR9]

Court proceedings MAY be issued blah blah... sounds like a typical frightener to me. It's that MAY that's the operative word there. Stay as you were. If proceedings were genuinely issued then you'd hve time to deal ok. It doesn't look to me from this letter though that they have any intent of doing that at present or else they'd be doing it not trying to scare you with the idea.

[fletch70]

Hey

Don't panic (or try not to)

 

That is not a letter before action, if you notice it says may not will.

 

Do you have a copy of the letter you sent in January. To be honest these people are not very joined up when it comes to communication.

 

The last post on this thread was Dec so I am a bit behind , I will try to read back and see where you are at.

BTW I have a few of those types of letters and have not yet been near a court (well not that type anyway lol)

[fletch70]

Hi again

Quick read through

You sent a CCA request , got one back which we have said looks wrong.

You wrote to them in Jan, what exactly did that letter say?

 

If it is appropriate you could send them a short letter saying

Dear Sir

Blah blah I refer you to my letter of xxxxxx copy enclosed.

[dx100uk]

another thing worth noting is the date of the letter they say crapest sent

 

nov 06!!

 

that's more than 6yrs ago!!

 

dx

[fletch70]

Haha well spotted DX.

[Rayn2036]

Well spotted DX, thanks, I must have read it about 20 times but never spotted that. Once again thanks Fletch and SWLABR9 for your input. I am glad I can count on you guys for all needed help.

 

This is what I wrote to them in Jan, to which they responded on 28th Jan saying hey will contact again in due course.

------------------------------------------------

"Thank you for your recent correspondence and the contents of which have been noted.

 

In response to my lawful CCA request you have chosen to supply an application form which did not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA1974). I would like a copy of the actual agreement. I appreciate that as per Carey v HSBC, a reconstituted agreement can be provided, however I am disputing the actual existence of such an original which means the Carey case is irrelevant as without one the account would still be deemed unenforceable.

 

The document you sent, purporting to be a credit agreement, does not contain all of the prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974, plus you did send an application form. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) made under the authority of the “1974 Act” sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 1983/1553 for the definition of what is required. Suffice to say, all of the required terms are not present in this document. Since this document does not contain the required prescribed terms it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974, which states.

 

This account is unenforceable until you comply with my original request and send a copy of the original document, if it exists. I would also remind you that you have an obligation under the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR 2008) to advise me if you hold, or have ever held, a properly executed Consumer Credit Agreement pertaining to myself. If no such document exists you are equally obliged to advise me of the fact.

 

I look forward to receiving your response within 14 days if I do not I will then consider the alleged debt to be unenforceable at that time."

---------------------------------

Last week CapQ called me on my mobile to which I refused to talk. Then I blocked their number from calling me on my mobile. Then they called me at work, again I refused to talk to them and ask them all communication must be in writing only. One thing I couldn't figure out, how did they know about my work? I have never told them where I work neither my DMP knew about it.

 

Please find attached CCA from Cap1 and CapQ response after my non-com.

[dx100uk]

really they rang you at work

 

OFT / ICO complain time me thinks

 

harassment at work etc.

 

as for the works number

 

sadly you've given it somewhere

 

192.com is a very good source they use.

CRA files too

as well as social media sites like facebook/myspace.

 

if you've ever given your works number on an agreement

and I bet you have

or car insurance application etc etc

 

they'll find it

 

there are companies/sites the datamine this info and sell it to DCA's

 

dx

[Rayn2036]

CapQ now bugging me big time.

 

They left several messages on my work phone over the weekend and they don't stop calling me at work.

 

I have already told them I have no intention of talking to them over the phone.

 

Should I talk to them once at least and make it clear that I will be reporting them to OFT?

[SWLABR9]

Have you not told them that already in writing?

 

Best to do that if you haven't already, then make the complaint.

 

Don't talk to them on the phone.

 

Next thing they'll be claiming you said all kinds of things.

 

It's essential to keep communications written so they can't pull stunts like that.

[Rayn2036]

I have already told them back in September...

[dx100uk]

ICO/OFT complaint

[fletch70]

When you told them in Sept was it for this account and was it capquest ?

 

The only reason I ask it that with Moorcroft every time they get a new account of mine I have to tell them again.

 

You could of course threaten legal action against them or send something like this....edit as needed

Dear Sirs

Ref: xxxxxxxx

I am writing in relation to the quantity and frequency of telephone calls that I have received from your company, which I deem to be personally harassing. I have verbally requested that these stop, but I am still receiving calls. I withdraw my consent (under s.10 of the DPA) for you to process my personal data with respect to my personal or work telephone numbers registered with you or stored on your systems/records. The processing and use of these numbers is causing significant distress.

 

Advice from Stepchange and the Information Commissioner indicates that your retention of contact details in the form of a correspondence address is sufficient to fulfil contractual obligations. This request supersedes any contractual provision that you may claim exists, and any attempt to claim otherwise will not be accepted or tolerated.

Under the DPA you have 21 days to respond to this request, and 28 days to cease processing and/or remove the data from your systems. Future use of my telephone number will be recorded and will indicate a breach of my request under the DPA, this will result in a complaint being raised with the Information Commissioner.

 

You will be deemed to have been served notice of my request and I will deem it served by {ENTER DATE - 23 DAYS FROM DATE OF LETTER}. I am advising you that any calls received after this date will be recorded with the intention of them being used as evidence. I feel it necessary to draw your attention to the recent Harrison v Link Financial case in which HH Judge Chambers outlined the predatory way in which the account holder was hounded; I quote, from this judgment;

Cumulatively and damningly is what I find to be the way that MBNA and the Defendant went about recovering their debt. I am satisfied that the Claimant’s description of the way that he was hounded by his creditors is essentially correct not least in the use of “non-traceable” telephone calls. It seems to me that such conduct has no proper function in the recovery of consumer debt.

I therefore suggest that you consider my request and update your records accordingly.

[Rayn2036]

Just checked, It was definitely sent to Capq.

I will send a letter first thing in the morning. Cheers guys

[Rayn2036]

UPDATE: received 30% discount offer if I call them before the 30th, if not legal action. Usual crap I guess. Letter attached.

[fletch70]

I would never want to assume that any letter was crap however I have received a few of those and it does seem a fairly standard one. Notice it says pre litigation review and may not will.

 

Have we established that this is unenforceable ?