SLC Cannot Supply The Original Agreement

[Peterbard]

think this is what you are after

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft020.pdf

 

or is it the The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 if its this one you want PM me your email addy and will send it you

 

Hi The orriginal prescribed terms are inthe 1983 regulaions shedul 6

 

But these were not ammended inthe ammendment regulations of 2004 so are still valid the are in the OFT FAQ 1983 regulations

 

8.3 What are the prescribed terms?

The prescribed terms specified in Sch 6 are as follows:

• amount of credit – see Q8.4

• credit limit – see Q8.5

• rate of interest – see Q8.6

• repayments – see Q8.9.

Sch 6 was not amended by the 2004 Regulations.

 

Regards

Peter

[ladybird17]

yes, I was listening to you Peter, but not making any further comments on this thread.

[paulwlton]

yes, I was listening to you Peter, but not making any further comments on this thread.

 

Why?

[ladybird17]

because I get enough grief at home!

[Pliny the Penuriosus]

Yes, but it's what KIND of offence that all the above banter has me confused about.

 

I think I'll just stick to criminal in my own mind. I almost wish I'd missed the past couple of days chit chat.

 

non compliance attracts, on summary judgement on a standard scale of 4 a fine of £2,500 and/or 3 months imprisoment.

 

Only a criminal offence can attract incarceration

[ladybird17]

Yes, I know I said I wouldn't comment again, and I'm sure someone will come along and tell me I'm wrong, and assuming that I am wrong, can someone tell me what this means, taken from HMPS Prison Orders:

 

 

"Information on sentence calculation, payment of fines etc. for prisoners committed for a civil offence or in default of a fine can be found in the Sentence Calculation Manual, chapters 16 and 17."

[ladybird17]

and for what it's worth, this as well...

It is worth noting that a prisoner can be serving a lengthy sentence as a result of defaulting on a confiscation order where the sum is significant. The prisoner is still classed as a civil prisoner and should receive the appropriate rights and privileges.....

[Pliny the Penuriosus]

They are being imprisoned for failing to comply with an order of the court otherwise called 'contempt'

 

We stopped jailing debtors years ago. WE now jail them for contempt

[ladybird17]

so what does this mean then?

 

. for prisoners committed for a civil offence or in default of a fine.......

if you are saying you can't be imprisoned for a civil offence?

[SteveH2508]

non compliance attracts, on summary judgement on a standard scale of 4 a fine of £2,500 and/or 3 months imprisoment.

 

Only a criminal offence can attract incarceration

 

At the risk of getting my head bitten off again - S78 non-compliance after the 12 days + 1 month default attracts a potential penalty on conviction of a fine up to Level 4 on the standard scale. There is NO imprisonment sanction. (See Schedule 1 of the CCA74)

[ladybird17]

you're ok Steve, this is the "get your head bitten off" thread!

[SteveH2508]

Anyone biting at the moment would get a serious slug of the finest malt whisky!!

[angry cat]

you're ok Steve, this is the "get your head bitten off" thread!

 

 

Ladybird, I dont think that anyone should get their 'Head Bitten Off' just because they query an issue on a post.

Debate is healthy.

 

We have all ascertained that a creditor who fails in their obligation to supply a copy of an Agreement within the the stated timescale commits an Offence, the Offence is classified as Criminal. The penalty for such an Offence is a fine of up to £2,500 and six months imprisonment (Level 4)

 

As this Offence is Criminal, Trading Standards who are the enforcement Officers, should prosecute. However, it would appear that there is no established case law for them to go by. (we all need to find an established case law to throw back at TS, there must be one somewhere?)

We all know that in the case of a Criminal Offence, it has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt!

 

Now, this is my view and only my humble view. It would appear that TS are unlikely to prosecute as they should, being the enforcement officers of the ACT, therefore there may not be a criminal prosecution.

However if, say you or I bring about a prosecution through a magistrates court, that would be classified as a civil prosecution...wouldn't it.

 

A comparison perhaps could be:-

The Social Security Act 1992, benefit Fraud, is a criminal Offence and carries a level 5 penalty, the enforement officers of the above Act can prosecute as there is established case law.

 

The Consumer Credit Act 1974, non compliance with S78, is a criminal offence and carries a level 4 penalty but the enforcement officers of this Act will not, or cannot prosecute as there is no established case law!

The above comparison examples are both regarding offences against Acts of Parliament.

 

I hope this all make sense...I'm probably totally wrong...my logic is often a bit wonky.

 

Go aheads and bite my head off, LOL

 

Love AC

[angry cat]

CCA 1974

 

167 Penalties

 

 

 

(1) An offence under a provision of this Act specified in column 1 of Schedule 1 is triable in the mode or modes indicated in column 3, and on conviction is punishable as indicated in column 4 (where a period of time indicates the maximum term of imprisonment, and a monetary amount indicates the maximum fine, for the offence in question).

 

Please note, the Term of imprisonment.

 

Love AC

[Peterbard]

non compliance attracts, on summary judgement on a standard scale of 4 a fine of £2,500 and/or 3 months imprisoment.

 

Only a criminal offence can attract incarceration

 

Hi Sorry but just to comlicate matters for you this out of the Sentance calculation Manual.

Chapter 17 Civil prisoners

17.1 General remarks

17.1.1 Civil prisoners are those who have been committed for contempt of court (the majority) or for various types of non-payment including:

· Maintenance arrears

· Legal Aid Contribution Orders

· Civil debt

· Council tax

· Recognizances to keep the peace or be of good behaviour

· Forfeiture of recognizance by a parent

17.1.2 Civil prisoners are also covered in the soon to be issued PSO, Unconvicted, Unsentenced and Civil Prisoners.

17.1.3 Civil prisoners have not been convicted of an offence and the sentencing warrant should not make any reference to a conviction (unless the prisoner has criminal convictions as well). Note that the types of non-payment considered in this Chapter do not include non payment of fines imposed in respect of criminal convictions, which is considered in Chapter 16. Terms served for civil offences are not reduced by police custody or remand time.

I Have highlighted the bit that i see as agreing with the contention that the section 77 issue is an criminal offence.

I think that this also proves Ladybirds point that custodial sentances can be handed out for civil offences.

Enjoy

Peter

[ladybird17]

Thanks Peter - however the HMPS sentencing manual goes further than just your highlighting...........

 

Terms served for civil offences are not reduced by police custody or remand time.

and Annex 1.....

EARLY RELEASE OF CIVIL PRISONERS......

[Movingon]

Quote from Peter's post above (right at the bottom)

 

"I think that this also proves Ladybirds point that custodial sentances can be handed out for civil offences."

[Peterbard]

Thanks Peter - however the HMPS sentencing manual goes further than just your highlighting...........

 

Terms served for civil offences are not reduced by police custody or remand time.

 

and Annex 1.....

 

EARLY RELEASE OF CIVIL PRISONERS......

 

Hi

 

Yes again i think it proves that civil senatancing and criminal are different so one cannot be used to offset the other.

As it says civil prisonors have not been convicted of any offence.

 

Agre?

 

Peter

[ladybird17]

far be it from me to start with the pins Peter , but I'm not sure I do.

17.1.3 as an isolated stand alone clause certainly makes it look that way, but if you read through the remainder, I think that clause relates to treatment of civil offenders who have yet to be so. But note that I say " I think". I would never be as dogmatic to tell you you're wrong when I cannot prove that you are.

 

When I run out of library books, I shall turn to the Prison Sentencing Manual for a little light bed-time reading!

[joneshousehold]

Not wishing to get embroiled in this debate I would just like to add an interesting thing that happened to me. I have made a complaint about Capital One & my S78 request to every regulatory body I could think of including the Trading Standards. They rang me on Friday and asked for more information and documents. The lady I spoke to said they need to look at this as it is a criiminal offence.

 

I don't know if the caller was an technical officer who would deal with the complaint or an administrative assistant so I have no idea how reliable the comment is.

 

It's just a thought to add into the equation.

[ladybird17]

we are now 3 -4

Three TS officers saying not criminal, 4 saying it is!

[Peterbard]

HI

Dogmatic isn't he Oblixe's dog in Asterix.

Anyway i hd a thought yes and i had a sit down and rest after(before you say it)

What if there are in fact two meanings for the words Civil in the legal parlance.

Cival as in a tort between two people and conducted in a civil court and civil as in civil rights or civil disturbance or civil prosecution ie for an action that effects the civilian population.

 

· Maintenance arrears

· Legal Aid Contribution Orders

· Civil debt

· Council tax

· Recognizances to keep the peace or be of good behaviour

· Forfeiture of recognizance by a parent

 

Al of the above could fall into the latter and could be regultated where as individual dissagreements over money or land could not.

 

The problem is if i put Civil legislation into my browser i get nada. By the way the cca is classed as Criminal legislation read it somewhere.

 

Go on then blow it out of the water just an idea, never know, might be right, it's possible, in for a penny, you dont ask you don't get, cast your bread on the water, am i waffling , i'll stop.

 

Regards

Petr

[Peterbard]

Not wishing to get embroiled in this debate I would just like to add an interesting thing that happened to me. I have made a complaint about Capital One & my S78 request to every regulatory body I could think of including the Trading Standards. They rang me on Friday and asked for more information and documents. The lady I spoke to said they need to look at this as it is a criiminal offence.

 

I don't know if the caller was an technical officer who would deal with the complaint or an administrative assistant so I have no idea how reliable the comment is.

 

It's just a thought to add into the equation.

 

Please do get embroyled (is that how you spell it?

 

More brains the better.

As i just mentioned i have a document somewhere that states that the cca is a criminal legislationand here it is,or part of it

 

LEGISLATION REQUIRED TO BE ENFORCED IN ENGLAND AND WALES

 

Trading Standards services generally have a statutory duty to enforce the following Acts of Parliament [statutory instruments including regulations made under these Acts are not included]

OTHER CRIMINAL LEGISLATION

 

AGRICULTURE ACT 1970

Provides for controls on the labelling of fertilisers and animal feeding stuffs.

Prevents excessive deleterious materials in animal feeding stuffs.

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE (GRADING AND MARKING) ACTS 1928 and 1931

Provides for the grading and marking of agricultural produce.

ANIMAL HEALTH ACT 1981

Provides for the control of animal diseases (that can be caught by humans), and for the welfare of animals on the farm, in transit and at market.

PROTECTION OF CHILDREN (TOBACCO) ACT 1986. THE CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS (PROTECTION FROM TOBACCO) ACT 1991

Prohibits the sale of tobacco to children.

Controls the siting of cigarette vending machines.

CLEAN AIR ACT 1993

Controls the lead content of petrol and the sulphur of diesel fuel in order to reduce atmospheric pollution.

CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974

Provides for control of consumer credit and hire.

Requires licensing of credit and hire traders.

Controls credit and hire advertising; debt collecting and credit reference agencies. Controls credit and hire documentation and format used to indicate credit charges. Provides powers to revoke licences of traders offering credit or hire charges.

Provides certain safeguards to consumers who purchase goods and services on credit.

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT 1987

Prohibits the supply of goods not in accordance with the general safety requirement or are unsafe.

Provides for the safety and protection of consumers by enabling Regulations or orders to be made controlling consumer goods.

Provides for approved safety standards to enable compliance with general safety requirements.

Provides powers for seizing and forfeiture, and the powers to suspend the sale of suspected unsafe goods.

Provisions as to the requirement for persons to publish notices warning of unsafe goods previously supplied.

Provides for liability for damage caused by defective products.

Prohibits misleading price indications.

CONTROL OF POLLUTION ACT 1974

Regards

Peter

[Peterbard]

we are now 3 -4

Three TS officers saying not criminal, 4 saying it is!

 

I Have it in writing somewhre from the OFT is that any good.

 

Peter

[Peterbard]

Hi

God fun this

But it is Criminal because it is an offence against statute and enforceable through the CPS.

If it isn't i will buy the witches a big bunch of flowers each and if you new how tight i am that would give you an idea of how sure i am.

 

Secure in the knowledge that my money is as safe as houses

Peter