Lantern/moriarty PAPLOC Now Claimform - chasing old Safety Net Credit loan ***Claim Dismissed***

[AndyOrch]

Requires work....as your agreement pre dates April 2007 the claimant can legally use a reconstituted version of the agreement to comply with your section 78 request. Reconstituted versions do not require signatures or dates as long as the Address/T&Cs are correct at the time of inception and it contains the original agreement number which it has.

 

Andy

[AndyOrch]

5 minutes ago, lee19921992 said:

Thanks, the agreement doesn't state anything other than my name and address and a date of Sig.. it doesn't detail of the amount of credit provided nor how many repayments to pay ect.. I could download a copy of the exact and edit the details over or am I over thinking?

 

A reconstituted version never does...its a generic copy of the overall lending for fixed amounts with APR,s and T&Cs etc

[AndyOrch]

Possibly so...but the more you can find and research to prove that it isn't an exact copy of your agreement the better.

 

I downloaded the copy from page 1...works fine.

[AndyOrch]

In Carey & Others v HSBC Bank PLC & Others, His Honour Judge Waksman QC held:

 

·        Lenders can satisfy a s78 (and s77) request by providing a reconstituted version of the executed agreement, which may be reconstituted from sources other than the actual signed agreement. A copy of the original signed agreement itself does not have to be provided.

·        The copy provided must contain, amongst other things, the name and address of the debtor as at the date of the agreement.

·        The document need not comply (if signed) with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (CCAR) as to form, as at the date the agreement was made.

·        If an agreement has been varied, a (reconstituted) copy of the original agreement must be provided along with a (reconstituted) copy of the amended agreement.

·        A breach of s78 does not of itself give rise to an unfair relationship within the meaning of s140A CCA.

·        The court can exercise its discretion and make a declaration that there has been a breach of s78, depending upon the facts of the particular case. If the lender has admitted the breach in the proceedings, the court will not make such a declaration.

·        In determining whether the debtor has signed a document stated to contain the "prescribed terms", the court held that, for the purposes of s61 and of s127(3) CCA, the document need not be a single piece of paper. A physical connection between several pieces of paper is not necessary. Where the debtor's signature and the prescribed terms are on separate pieces of paper, the question of whether together they constitute one document is a question of substance, not form. Mere cross-reference to prescribed terms without a copy being supplied to the debtor at the time of signature would not suffice.

·        If the lender cannot establish, following a trial, that there was a document signed by the debtor containing the prescribed terms, that would not of itself entail an unfair relationship.

[AndyOrch]

3 hours ago, lee19921992 said:

Thanks.

 

so i clearly understand, they have complied with s78 in providing a reconstituted copy of the agreement..correct .however they will need to show the true copy of the agreement in court Incorrect and The document must include the credit limit, the interest rate and details of how and when a debtor is to discharge his payment obligations. Only if the agreement has been varied which I assume your hasn't

 

the true copy must also have my signature also. They dont have to provide a true copy your agreement was post 2007 .....circ 2016

 

I'm trying my hardest to get my head around this so thanks for your patience.

 

 

Andy

[AndyOrch]

Take it with you...and if you succeed ask the judge if you can claim costs.

[AndyOrch]

Well done Lee topic title updated.

 

Andy