Nat West - Is this a credit agreement?

[gettingthere]

I sent CCA request to Nat West and received the following after 15 working days. The alleged agreement they have sent me is almost totally illegible but on the top it clearly states 'Forte Mastercard Application Form'. I have tried to blow the top part up but it really is totally illegible. They also sent me a copy of my last statement and a current copy of terms and conditions.

 

Before I respond would anyone like to comment on what I have received?

 

 

[rory32]

Well first of all the copy of the agreement has to be legible. Secondly it is clearly an application form.

 

I would write back to them and thank them for the copy of the agreement (after all if they state it is then it must be ), but point out that the copy that they have supplied is illegible and also does not comply with s60(1) and 61(1) of the Act so would be unenforceable as per s127(3) of the Act.

[diskmandave]

Let's not forget Section 1 of The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983, which also states that copies of documents must be legible.

 

Good luck, Dave.

 

[gettingthere]

I have drafted the following reply - will this be ok?

 

Dear ***********

 

I refer to my letter dated **** July 2007 and your reply and enclosures dated **** July, the contents of which are noted.

 

The copy of the document you have sent me appears to be an application form as that is how it is headed.

 

This copy is almost totally illegible and does not comply with S60(1) and S61(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and so would be unenforceable as per S127(3) of the same act.

 

Also it does not comply with Section 1 of The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983, which also states that copies of documents must be legible.

 

Can you please confirm that this ‘application form’ is the document you will rely on as being the signed agreement in relation to this account in any future enforcement action against me?

 

Yours faithfully

 

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

[cresswell80]

hi... did you send this as appear to be in the same boat with HFC (illegible "agreement")?

[gettingthere]

hi... did you send this as appear to be in the same boat with HFC (illegible "agreement")?

 

Yes have sent it recorded delivery - just waiting to see what their response will be.

[gettingthere]

Received the following in response to my letter. they sent it on 'Mint' headed paper instead of Nat West!

 

 

So I then responded with this.

 

"Thank you for your letter dated 13th August 2007 the contents of which are noted.

 

I must admit I was confused for a short time as your letter was headed Mint which is a business name for Royal Bank of Scotland whereas the above agreement was with Nat West but I now realise that you are one and the same thing.

 

I note from your letter that you agree that the document you supplied me is an application form. I quote from your letter “As we have supplied a copy of the application form that you signed”

 

If this is the document that you intend to rely on in any enforcement action then its validity will have to be decided upon by a Judge.

 

However I would reiterate that this is an application form, the copy of which supplied to me is almost totally illegible. It therefore does not comply with S.60(1) and S.61(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and so would be unenforceable as per S127(3) of the same act.

 

You have quoted in your letter regulations 3(2) and 7(1)(b) of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations1983. I would ask that you look at section 1 of the same act which states that copies of documents must be legible. As stated previously the application form you have sent me is not legible!

 

I have enclosed a copy for your convenience, can you read it?

 

Furthermore, you should remember that a creditor is not permitted to take any action against an account whilst it remains in dispute. The lack of a correctly executed credit agreement is a very clear legal dispute and therefore the following applies:

 

• You may not demand any payment on this account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you.

• You may not add any further interest or charges to this account.

• You may not pass this account to any third party.

• You may not register any information in respect of this account with any of the credit reference agencies.

• You may not issue a default notice related to this account.

 

Be warned, the CCA 1974 is clear that a default can only be issued for breach of a valid, regulated agreement. If there is no regulated agreement, as is the case at this moment in time, then you cannot issue a default as I have not breached any valid, regulated agreement.

 

I reserve the right to pass all information to Trading Standards including the copy of the illegible application form you have sent me.

 

Any enforcement action you may bring against me will be vigorously defended.

 

Yours faithfully"

 

 

They have now replied with this.

 

 

Is there anything else I should do or should I just sit back and wait?

[diskmandave]

I think they're going round in circles with Section 78 compliance, and avoiding the issue of the "agreements" enforceability, in law.

If you are not happy with this, you may seek whatever legal redress you consider is open to you.

The ball's been put firmly back in your court if you'll excuse the unfortunate choice of word!

 

You've got to decide where you want to go with this, back down or fight & defend in Court, as that is what they're saying, although not quite in so many words...

 

Good luck, Dave.