SLC Cannot Supply The Original Agreement

[rosybunny06]

Hello Folks

Just to let you know I sent a letter under the CCA to HFC Bank in July and they have failed to provide me with a copy of the original agreement. I have stopped making payments after they failed to comply with my request. They tried to make me continue paying by threatening extra charges etc. and have now passed my details to a debt recovery company. I rang the debt company this morning to explain my position and they have put a hold on my account until further notice. I have written a letter to HFC stating "letter before action" explaining that they have failed to comply and that if they continue to pursue me for money I will report them to the relevant authorities.

You can all keep you fingers crossed that this will do the trick and they will close the matter.

[andrew1]

 

You can all keep you fingers crossed that this will do the trick and they will close the matter.

 

Toes, legs and arms too Good luck

[rosybunny06]

Thank you I appreciate your support I am a bit apprehensive about the whole thing.

[andrew1]

Thank you I appreciate your support I am a bit apprehensive about the whole thing.

 

 

You may well be, we have all been there, even those who sound as if they are not apprehensive have been there too - it's been a long journey for a lot of people on the site and they are staying behind to help all the rest. Never feel alone - there's over 75,000 people behind you, watching, helping, waiting and waiting for your next posting - they are also rejoicing along with you once you have won - and you will

[ppauls150]

You may well be, we have all been there, even those who sound as if they are not apprehensive have been there too - it's been a long journey for a lot of people on the site and they are staying behind to help all the rest. Never feel alone - there's over 75,000 people behind you, watching, helping, waiting and waiting for your next posting - they are also rejoicing along with you once you have won - and you will

 

Probably one of the best quotes i have seen on this site. very nicely put

[ecobabe]

hi, i've been doing this process as well. eventually got a letter from the dca saying that the original loan company can't find the agreement, and they know they can't pursue debt thru court now, but are surprised I am asking this after paying x amount back to them over 60 months. they then offer me a settlement figure. now i have paid loads of charges on this; probably more than the settlement figure. what do you think i should do?

[pugsley]

ask them for your money back, it's unenforceable and they owe you money, they have been asking for money falsely, it's you in the driving seat now. If you pay any more money or admit the debt the position may change, so ask for them to offer a settlement amount to you, i.e. they will give you back so much money for you not to take them to court.

[pugsley]

update....

got a confirmation letter last friday STATING..account is now closed and the debt is now written off and account balance is £0.00 owed, i then phoned them stating i have a copy of my credit file infront of me and told them i wanted the default removing asap, they said they would look in to it, got a letter today saying they have requested the removal of the default..hehe

going back to the point do i ask for the money back that i have paid to them, so i did, they said an offer will be in the post in the next 48 hours.......lol

 

 

have you seen this post from the thread starter.

[andrew1]

have you seen this post from the thread starter.

 

 

Oh yeah! there's 287 posts to read !! :D

[Andy999]

Hello,

 

I don't mean to hijack this post, but could you just tell me wether secured loans are regulated under the Consumer Credit Act?

 

Many thanks

 

I know first charge mortgages aren't regulated, but have a feeling second charge loans are. However I don't think any loans for over £25,000 are covered by the CCA - although it's been a while since I worked in lending so may be wrong...

[paulwlton]

I think loans above £25,000 are regulated by the FSA.

[andrew1]

The CCA Act 1974 regulates loans up to £25k. The new CCA Act 2006 which will come into effect in April 2008 has lifted that limit altogether so any amount for a Consumer as aposed to business will be covered by the Act. Business Loans up to £25,000 will also be covered by the Act from April 2008, above £25k will not. (information comes with thanks from the DTI)

[Peterbard]

No they are NOT correct & Yes you should but I should also write & ask them which bit of the act they claim exonerates them from its consequences.

 

I am sending the following on Monday any coments or amendment recomendations greatfully recieved.

Orange Ltd. Addresss

Ms Clair Brown

Senhouse Road

Darlington

DL1 4Y3

 

Dear Ms Brown

 

RE Account ***************

 

Thank you for your reply dated 25 September 2006.

 

I am interested to hear that you are of the opinion that your company is exempt from the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and would be grateful if you would point out the relevant sections in the Distance selling regulations that support this contention.

 

Meanwhile I must remind you that my request under the CCA, sections 77-79 are still ongoing.

 

My original request was issued on the 4th of September 2006.

 

This means that according to the above act you should have responded by the 20th of September 2006 and are now in default.

If no reply is received within the next 30 calendar days (by the 20th October 2006) you will be guilty of committing a criminal offence and I will have no option but to proceed as per my previous correspondence.

 

 

Yours Sincerely

 

 

 

******************

 

cc O.F.T

[baconbuttyman]

Just To Clarify, I Dont Think I Actually Put It On Here.

I Got The Loan Quashed, The Money I Have Paid The, They Have Now Returned Cos I Told The To, Also, They Have Now Removed The Defaults On My Credit File

[lickthewallfatboy]

top result-I bet they hate it when people exercise their rights and put them back in their box!!

[darling]

I sent a CCA request to NCO & Thames Credit on 13/10. 12 days 1/11 & 30 days = 1/12/2006. Hope i'm doing the right thing here peeps. Here's my links can they be checked pls. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-bailiffs-advice/39605-darling-nco-europe.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/other-institutions/24468-eunice-west-thames-credit.html

 

Thanks in advance guys.

[karens25]

i sent a cca request to moorcroft regarding a choice catalogue account i had, 12 days plus 30 calendar days is up on monday!! all phone callls and letters have ceased

thanks to everyone on this site

karen

[andrew1]

i sent a cca request to moorcroft regarding a choice catalogue account i had, 12 days plus 30 calendar days is up on monday!! all phone callls and letters have ceased

thanks to everyone on this site

karen

 

 

karens25 it is 12 'working' days ie: Mon - Fri ( +2 for delivery time) + ONE MONTH (not 30 days) make sure your have all the days right - wouldn't want you caught out on a daft technicality.

[kateandpete]

Just To Clarify, I Dont Think I Actually Put It On Here.

I Got The Loan Quashed, The Money I Have Paid The, They Have Now Returned Cos I Told The To, Also, They Have Now Removed The Defaults On My Credit File

Wish I had your luck.

HSBC have sent me a copy of the 1983 Regulations that state that true copies of agreements do not need signatures. They also sent me a copy of their regular agreement forms and argue that they have now satisfied the s.78 request.

 

see here for more details

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/24736-default-removal-katenandpete-hsbc-4.html#post304863

 

Someone has said that the 1983 regulations have been superceeded, but they are very hard to find. Does anyone here know more?

[Number6]

What regulations are they referring to? Let me have the exact title and I'll look it up for you.

 

Pete

[alanfromderby]

I believe it is section 3 of SI 1983/1553 - I have been trying to find a copy of this myself, because section 3(1) clearly states that they must supply a true copy of the original document...not a generic one. This would somewhat negate the argument over the signature.

[Number6]

Not this is it:

 

Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983?

 

If so then regulation 3(1) and (2) only relate to copies of non-executed agreements:

 

Reg 3(1) of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations requires that, subject to certain limited exceptions, any copy of an unexecuted agreement must be a ‘true copy’. This means that it must be identical to the agreement as presented or sent to the debtor for signature.

 

Reg 3(2) permits the exclusion from the copy agreement of:

 

• any information relating to the debtor, or included for the creditor’s use, which is not required by the Agreements Regulations;

 

• the name and address of the debtor; and

 

• any signature box.

 

Pete

[alanfromderby]

Now that is interesting. The wording I have got states "executed" agreements - I am not 100% of my source and have been trying to get a full text of SI 1553 which was issued in 1983.

 

This is the wording I have:

 

3 General requirements as to form and content of copy documents

 

(1) Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act shall be a true copy thereof.

 

(2) There may be omitted from any such copy:

 

(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instrument or other document relating to the debtor, hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;

 

(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancellable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of the signature by the debtor of an agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

 

© in the case of any copy of an unexecuted agreement delivered or sent to the debtor or hirer under section 62 of the Act, the name and address of the debtor or hirer;

 

(d) in the case of any copy of an executed agreement given to the debtor under section 77(1) of the Act for fixed-sum credit, or under section 78(1) for running-account credit, under which a person takes any articles in pawn, any description of the article taken in pawn.

[Number6]

OK Alan

 

What I have is a OFT document entitled:

 

Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 as amended by the 2004 Amendment Regulations

Consumer Credit (Disclosure of Information) Regulations 2004

Consumer Credit (Early Settlement) Regulations 2004

Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

 

Bold and italics are mine.

 

It states:

 

1.23 What about copies of unexecuted agreements?

S62 requires that if an unexecuted agreement is presented personally to the debtor for signature, but does not become executed at the point at which he signs it, a copy of the agreement (and any document referred to in it) must also be given to the debtor at the same time.

 

If the agreement is sent to the debtor for signature, a copy of the agreement (and any document referred to in it) must be sent at the same time. This is irrespective of whether the agreement becomes executed at the point at which the debtor signs it.

 

If the above requirements are not satisfied, the agreement is not properly executed – see Q1.12.

 

1.24 Does the copy have to be identical?

 

Reg 3(1) of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations requires that, subject to certain limited exceptions, any copy of an unexecuted agreement must be a ‘true copy’. This means that it must be identical to the agreement as presented or sent to the debtor for signature.

 

Reg 3(2) permits the exclusion from the copy agreement of:

 

• any information relating to the debtor, or included for the creditor’s use, which is not required by the Agreements Regulations;

 

• the name and address of the debtor; and

 

• any signature box.

 

I repeat that, according to this document, which is NOT the actual Act or SI, merely an OFT publication, it relates to enexecuted agreements only.

 

Pete

[Number6]

See HERE and see the last paragraph; this seems to corroborate my earlier post.

 

Pete