Stubie-One:

Hi All,

Just picked this up off CAG forum.

Office of Fair Trading

OFT Enquiries

Fleetbank House

2-6 Salisbury Square

London

EC4Y 8JX

FAILURE by xxxxxxx ltd Under Sections 77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Account No XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX

Dear Sir or Madam

As is my right under Sections 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, I wrote to xxxx on {date} requesting a true, signed (legible) copy of any credit agreement (inc statements) that exists in relation to the above account, including the statutory fee of £1.00.

Under the terms of the above Act, xxxxx had 12 working days to provide the requested document and a further calendar month to rectify this default. Both of these deadlines have now passed and I have received nothing in relation to my request.

This led me to only one conclusion that no signed credit agreement exists in relation to this account. An agreement that does not contain all of the prescribed terms, and/or is not signed by the debtor, is completely unenforceable, even in a court of law.

I have today sent a letter to xxxxxxx refuting the debt and stating that any legal action proposed by them will be vigorously defended as I believe that they may have committed an offence under the CCA punishable by a level 4 fine.

Additionally, as there has never been any regulated agreement in relation to this account, I maintain that xxxxxxx do not have my consent to process my data and have requested that they remove all data referring to them from the records of all 3 Credit reference agencies.

With respect to the above may, I respectfully request that you begin an investigation into the failures of xxxxxxxx and in the meantime your comments, advice & guidance in the above would be much appreciated.

Yours faithfully

In case it helps, this is one option in the escalation library

S

Hi All,

Sorry I have not replied to you answers but had a pretty major weekend and computer trouble on top. Many thanks for your posts especially the success story where the guy got 2500 written off I will reread his letter and send something similar to the ccc's and will let you know how I get on.

Has anyone had any experiemnce with claims managment companys that deal with all this for you?

Capt

Hi everyone,

take a look at this thread and especially the linked document from the OFT.

Seems the regulators are taking an interest, some of the detail regarding what the OFT considers unacceptable.

Happy reading

http://www.moneysupermarket.com/community/forums/t/1st-credit-are-on-a-yellow-card-the-oft-need-your-34339.aspx

S

Hi Stubie/Everh,

I was on the CAG website last night till the small hours of the morning. Very informative (like this one), and interesting. I decided to spend time reading the success stories, to give me a little hope. One of the things it seems CCC's have been caught out on, is incorrect timescales in default notices, which renders them invalid.

Heres a little extract

The Judge says he has been looking through the paperwork for the case, but before he can say much the Barrister informs him that the bank has discontinued because of the invalid DN. However, he says he does not agree with the other points in the defence, and is only conceding on 1 out of 3 points.

The Judge says there have been quite a few of these claims recently, and that an invalid DN is Fatal. The Judge says to me that this is good news for me, and seems to imply that the banks do not generally take any further action.

Its very interesting, just awfully time consuming, and I think I need a strategy of reading about 30 minutes at a time.

Nix

Hello,

Excellent work S, this could be very useful somewhere down the line. Am I right in thinking this would be used if a default is issued/registered with a CRA, and you prevously advised the CCC that the account was in dispute, and didn't acknowledge any debt to them?

Nixxy

Hi All,

Just picked this up off CAG forum.

Office of Fair Trading

OFT Enquiries

Fleetbank House

2-6 Salisbury Square

London

EC4Y 8JX

FAILURE by xxxxxxx ltd Under Sections 77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Account No XXXX-XXXX-XXXX-XXXX

Dear Sir or Madam

As is my right under Sections 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, I wrote to xxxx on {date} requesting a true, signed (legible) copy of any credit agreement (inc statements) that exists in relation to the above account, including the statutory fee of £1.00.

Under the terms of the above Act, xxxxx had 12 working days to provide the requested document and a further calendar month to rectify this default. Both of these deadlines have now passed and I have received nothing in relation to my request.

This led me to only one conclusion that no signed credit agreement exists in relation to this account. An agreement that does not contain all of the prescribed terms, and/or is not signed by the debtor, is completely unenforceable, even in a court of law.

I have today sent a letter to xxxxxxx refuting the debt and stating that any legal action proposed by them will be vigorously defended as I believe that they may have committed an offence under the CCA punishable by a level 4 fine.

Additionally, as there has never been any regulated agreement in relation to this account, I maintain that xxxxxxx do not have my consent to process my data and have requested that they remove all data referring to them from the records of all 3 Credit reference agencies.

With respect to the above may, I respectfully request that you begin an investigation into the failures of xxxxxxxx and in the meantime your comments, advice & guidance in the above would be much appreciated.

Yours faithfully

In case it helps, this is one option in the escalation library

Hi Nixxy,

It was late!!

If an agreement is unsigned it doesn't become improperly executed, it become unenforceable.

CCA 1974 s127:

(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section
61(1)(a) (signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether
or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1))
itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or
hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

Is the relevant section.

An improperly executed agreement can be executed on the order of a court whereas an unenforcible agreement cannot be executed on the order of a court due to a non-compliance with s61 (1).

What I said in the original post is not accurate and the difference is the whole crux of the discussion on this and many similar threads. To miss this is to miss the whole point of what we are trying to do.

I didn't want to mislead anyone as this would have cause wholesale confusion.

The above is the true situation, as I see it.

S

I agree about the originator.

We do seem to end up talking amongst ourselves a lot of the time and yet there are thousand viewing these threads.

Where are you, captainBob, your country needs you.

S

I suppose, going back to the original thread:

I got hold of the elusive SI 1557 today.

The consumer credit (cancellation notices and copies of documents) regulations 1983.

The ones the CCCs quote at you to avoid (try to) sending you your agreement. I wanted to scan and publish but the scanner has bitten the dust.

Suffice to say that it isn't much but does allow creditors to omit the signature, signature box, relvant dates and personal info but still requires the copy to be a true copy. The creditor will still have to produce the original in court, if he's brave enough to go!!!

Any copy, therefore (IMHO) must be a true copy (photocopy, or similar) of the original executed agreement, just with personal bits cut off or obscured.

They cannot vary the agreement as this would render it unexecuted (different to the original executed agreement) and, therefore, at the very least, improperly executed. so a copy would need to be identical (a true copy) of the original. The intent of the original act has not changed, merely some detail omitted for security reasons - mainly, I suspect related to s85.

S

I tried to delete this but can't....Ignore it, I will re-post tomorrow (later today) when I'm awake and not posting cr*p)

S

Hi Nixxy,

The truth is, they draw the line at the court room door, because they loose, or at your front door, because they get arrested.

I have to say that I was surprised how blatantly they were prepared to cross the line but when you hear the stories of how weak and toothless the enforcement agencies are, there is little to be surprised at.

I wonder how mch better RBS will behave now they are public owned (almost)? Much the same as the dividends will go to the treasury rather than the fat cats but both have a good appetite for the pound in YOUR pocket.

We will beat them WE WILL!!!

S

Hi All,

This post is great, but I find it a terrible shame that the person who started the thread has not made a contribution since starting the query/asking for advice. Someone else once mentioned this, but I think once you post a query you should keep an eye on replies, and at least thank people who have taken the time to respond.

I can see that a great deal of time was spent (S-One's long post), and once again I thank you.

Nix

Hi S,

Thanks for providing this information, it is really good, and very interesting. I must admit, I do find it more difficult to navigate the CAG forum. I have looked on it several times, but it takes longer to trawl through. I guess if we want to find out more and be knowlegeable about these things, we'll have to spend the time.

It really keeps my hopes up, what a result this chap got. I know I would be stressing out like his wife if those letters were arriving for me.

I'm just so grateful that people like you give advice here, and that others like this chap, share their experiences, so we are given the courage and given hope to either start the process or carry on. These big companies behave as though they are so many notches better than 'Jimmy the loan shark'. and I was amazed to find they did not and do not comply with legislation and their own terms and conditions. Blatantly issuing default notices, charging higher interest rates than agreed, charging late/default fees left, right and centre. I guess they draw the line at knocking your knee caps in.

Some of these large firms don't realise the impact their telephone calls, and letters can have on people. They quite literally drive some people to suicide.

Thanks again for the post Stubie, you are fab.

Nix

Yes EverH,

It is a massive resource but difficult to navigate through.

I have read about 30 threads so far, one of them 15000 posts long! but the content is worth the effort.

The more you read, the better informed, and, therefore, armed, you are. The legislation is worth spending time on but it is difficult to keep the thread of the legislation and the regulations - not for the faint hearted.

I'm guessing that the CCCs and DCAs could do a lot more if they took the time to research but as they don't, we have the upper hand.

There are also numerous people who have dared and won, as with the above posting.

Keep in mind that people are taking the institutions on and winning, just read about one person who was pushed all the way to the courtroom, and walked away with £29,000 written off.

We are in the right, and we should never lose sight of that, whatever the tactics used against us.

S

WOW! Thanks for all that, a lot of good stuff there.There's a lot we can all use.But all that grief.

In a way it's everyone's problem. As a nation we have let this happen , all these companies profiting by other people's misfortune.I really feel for all those poor souls who are so traumatised that they don't have a clue which way to turn, despite all the ads in the press, it's so hard to get the courage to take the first step. It makes me feel so lucky to be on line and be able to take part in this forum.

Consumer Action Group has some really good stuff on it but it's so vast that it's easy to get lost or overwhelmed.