Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

Used to be with a different firm and the op has moved twice.

Even better, means leave it as is and see what happens. Don't push them into a position whereby they can remedy this basic breach...

Might not be as easy as you think to get the correct debtor details given the op won't tell them.

The OP is the debtor - what you mean?

I'd reply based on Pauls advice on this forum and the fact it might be fixable, if they're able.

Yea so we play the normal UE game and don't go diving in feet first, you'll find my method is also proven to be just as effective as Pauls thus we get along so well. We won't and don't play one another off, we are both right but have differing views in that he thinks legal all the time (rightly so) whereby I think fight utilising the associated acts at our disposal (rightly so) - thus however you butter it up we both have the same views in that it's best to leave a creditor with egg on their face so if they've messed up by sending wrong terms - great! Lets hope they do take action and submit those as the 'ones' - straight away Paul would rip them a new hole and we'd have another success on our hands. If however we do what you suggest and lay our cards out on the table; then what? The creditor will easily go correct things then issue a claim knowing we will lose.

127(3) is a harder defence than 78.

and what about the associated problems with s.61 (and s.65 in relation to s.127)?

[mystery1]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

Even better, means leave it as is and see what happens. Don't push them into a position whereby they can remedy this basic breach...

The OP is the debtor - what you mean?

Yea so we play the normal UE game and don't go diving in feet first, you'll find my method is also proven to be just as effective as Pauls thus we get along so well. We won't and don't play one another off, we are both right but have differing views in that he thinks legal all the time (rightly so) whereby I think fight utilising the associated acts at our disposal (rightly so) - thus however you butter it up we both have the same views in that it's best to leave a creditor with egg on their face so if they've messed up by sending wrong terms - great! Lets hope they do take action and submit those as the 'ones' - straight away Paul would rip them a new hole and we'd have another success on our hands. If however we do what you suggest and lay our cards out on the table; then what? The creditor will easily go correct things then issue a claim knowing we will lose.

and what about the associated problems with s.61 (and s.65 in relation to s.127)?

But you have said it's UE which we take your word for. So do you wait for SB or try and see if you can back them into a corner on another issue which may result in a nice letter of concession whilst getting some brownie points for a potential judge ?

M1

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

But you have said it's UE which we take your word for. So do you wait for SB or try and see if you can back them into a corner on another issue which may result in a nice letter of concession whilst getting some brownie points for a potential judge ?

M1

And if you find me a case where I said it was UE where it wasn't I'll stop helping here and walk away......

I only offer help, you don't have to listen to me.

That said, no. you're quite wrong, you never ever push the creditor or DCA into submission and must always see out SB - based on McGuffick meaning as you'll be defaulted already, pushing the creditor into a corner achieves nothing other than the risk of wiping out a recent case law; look at Rankine - need I say any more? She fell flat on her face after trying to push the law and it cost her everything.

That is the one thing we will never do, we always err on the side of caution as is the right thing to do. You wanna play Russian Roulette be my guest but please don't ask users of our forum to do it.

Thanks

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

angelsoxx

To clarify if I was you, I would be sending this back to Lloyds: ---> Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | CCA Query - Missing Prescribed Terms

[angelsoxx]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

I looked and replied

I've not got it! I just checked my junk folders incase- nothing there
Can you cut n' paste n'msg me through here if you have a minute?

[Deepie]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

I've not got it! I just checked my junk folders incase- nothing there
Can you cut n' paste n'msg me through here if you have a minute?

He's replied here on your thread...........

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

I've not got it! I just checked my junk folders incase- nothing there
Can you cut n' paste n'msg me through here if you have a minute?

Here

Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-) - Page 2 - allaboutFORUMS

[angelsoxx]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

angelsoxx

To clarify if I was you, I would be sending this back to Lloyds: ---> Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | CCA Query - Missing Prescribed Terms

Downloaded and being filled with my details- so basically, tell them they're wrong but don't tell them why? "if you don't know, i'm not going to tell you"?

Should I send this now or after the 12+2?

I would like to know if they DO actually hold the correct information, is there any reason to NOT send a SAR? And is there a template for this?

Thanks again everyone, I can't get over how much happier and relaxed i've been since I was pointed here just yesterday!

[angelsoxx]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

Here

Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-) - Page 2 - allaboutFORUMS

Thanks, i've been following the convo on my phone which does not display forums very well and likes to hide my emails!

[angelsoxx]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

Send that as it is, no need for the 12+2 letter....

a SAR template is here: ---> Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | Subject Access (SAR) - Advanced Request

However hold fire on the SAR for now, just wait and see what develops as a result of the s.78 query.....

Will do! I need a little saluting emoticon

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

reposted this as I edited it a lot:

Send the template as it is, no need for the 12+2 letter.... Of course they may omit the CCA and terms from the SAR as most do and right now it's not worth the hassle fighting for proof, if they cannot or have not provided it they cannot take action. If they do start action then we can demand copies of what they have under CPR and from there establish if there is a defence - learn to walk before run.

a SAR template is here: ---> Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | Subject Access (SAR) - Advanced Request

However hold fire on the SAR for now, just wait and see what develops as a result of the s.78 query.....

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

I need a little saluting emoticon

[angelsoxx]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

Right, I shall send this and keep everyone posted on the results. One quick this, "a copy of which is attached" is this essential as I have no scanner!

[angelsoxx]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

Right, I shall send this and keep everyone posted on the results. One quick this, "a copy of which is attached" is this essential as I have no scanner!

And i live in the sticks!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Lloyds CCA- wrong address! Advise please :-)

127(3) is a harder defence than 78.

to to elaborate on what I said earlier about s.78 holding it's own weight - As I say, there are processes and if they fail at the actual original request then anything after this is flawed as they are in default of s.78 which actually plays hard on everything else that follows.....

From Paul earlier tonight.....

if they have not complied with s78 then thats a killer, if the s78 request was made and was valid.