Account terminated

[Exclus]

About 17 years ago I had a credit card with Associates, who morphed or were bought out by Citi. Some years ago I stopped paying Citi and requested a copy agreement - after some tooing-and-froing they admitted they could not supply an agreement, and duly sold the debt to Hillesdon. Hillesdon also confirm that they cannot supply an agreement, and have not been adding interest, but have continued to send on monthly statements, with overdue payments being reported to the credit agencies. This does not bother me too much as my credit rating is zero anyway.
I have now received a letter saying that the account has been terminated, with the usual threat of a collection agent making a home call, which is now like being hit with a feather!
Would I be correct in I presuming that the term 'account terminated' means that they have really given up due the fact they cannot supply an agreement? Or are they planning some other form of collection.
Any advice would be appreciated.

[Undercover Elsa]

Re: Account terminated

It simply means they've realised they're sending you monthly statements for nothing and have terminated the account. May be a precursor to selling it on, or not.
I have one like this where they just keep sending statements sans interest after they couldn't produce the agreement.

When was your last payment made, Exclus?

[Exclus]

Re: Account terminated

Thanks for your prompt reply.
I'll check in the files, but it must be about 4-5 years ago, and was made to Citi. I don't think I've ever paid anything to Hillesden.
Presumably, if they cannot produce an agreement, there is very little they can do to enforce the debt.

[ScabHunter]

Re: Account terminated

God alone knows what Hillesden mean by 'account terminated', as the real termination happened at the point of absolute assignment to them in the first place. Whatever false meaning they have given the phrase, it doesn't alter the facts. If there is no agreement to produce in court, there is no agreement and that is that. It should be possible to fend off any threats until this goes SB.

The only possible danger would be if the card was taken out before 19th May 1985. That would complicate matters considerably.

SH

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Account terminated

Hiya

Just picked up on this. You'll find that progressive finance (or opus) will send a recon and try and imply that as being good. Obviously it's not but they think it is.

So chances are you'll probably find Opus chasing you (they bought all the SAV Credit & Citi portfolio). Just keep us updated with any developments. I know this is 6 months old so hoping I'm not tempting fate replying

[SXGuy]

Re: Account terminated

Niddy i wouldnt worry, Opus couldnt find a citi agreement for my mum and they left it at that, not heard a dicky since, been 18 months.

In regards to DLC, they do like to keep sending statements, but its unlikely they will do anything while they know they have no agreement.

Im guessing you get the standard "we have some new info relating to this account please telephone us" letters? Ignore them, just a tatic to try and get you to ring and agree to pay.

[garlok]

Re: Account terminated

God alone knows what Hillesden mean by 'account terminated', as the real termination happened at the point of absolute assignment to them in the first place. Whatever false meaning they have given the phrase, it doesn't alter the facts. If there is no agreement to produce in court, there is no agreement and that is that. It should be possible to fend off any threats until this goes SB.

The only possible danger would be if the card was taken out before 19th May 1985. That would complicate matters considerably.

SH

Why is the 1984 date so much more of a problem SH please? When we started out on this I had this worry as well thinking that one of ours predated this May 1984 date. I was told by the specialist solicitor we had at the time that this was not entirely relevant. The Act was brought onto he Statute Book in 1974 and enacted it was said in 1977 therefore the full implications of the Act were in force at the time. As in all law, it cannot be retroactively imposed on anyone. I would be interested to hear your feelings on this. We have had formal back downs (tempting fate) on our two oldest accounts which are around that time.

regards
G

[SXGuy]

Re: Account terminated

I could be wrong, but i dont think its the actual CCA 1974 thats an issue for pre 1985 debts, but the amendments to the act since 1985 thats the issue.

I.e they didnt need to have a true copy of an agreement pre 1985.

Could be totally wrong of course.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Account terminated

Yep basically anything before May 1985 means they're exempt, ie the creditor DOES NOT need to comply with s.78. Garlok, your solicitor misinformed you - it's very important as the lender doesn't require compliance with any s.77-79 request. It falls under The Consumer Credit (Agreements and Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) (Amendment) Regulations 1985.

See here --> The Consumer Credit (Agreements and Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) (Amendment) Regulations 1985

In a nutshell, the easiest way of describing this would be to say that the act (originally enacted in 1983) allows for a lender to issue a recon. Anything before this date (19th May 1985) would not need to be dealt with by a creditor as technically talking the act was not there allowing them to issue a recon was it, so how could they? The act changed effective 19th May 1985 whereby any agreement after this date can be supplied using the merits of The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983/5 - ie allowing the creditor to create a recon. Anything prior to this, the creditor can literally write and say to you "we do not have a copy, sorry".

Hope that makes sense - original here --> The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983

[Exclus]

Re: Account terminated

I think that Elsa hit the nail on the head saying that they realised sending on monthly statements was a waste of time and money. Since then the only contact I have had is a yearly statement.Now hoping this goes SB before too long.
My thanks to everyone who took the time and trouble to offer help and advice, it really is appreciated.

[SA Gold]

Re: Account terminated

INow hoping this goes SB before too long.

Got my fingers crossed for you on this one

[garlok]

Re: Account terminated

Yep basically anything before May 1985 means they're exempt, ie the creditor DOES NOT need to comply with s.78. Garlok, your solicitor misinformed you - it's very important as the lender doesn't require compliance with any s.77-79 request. It falls under The Consumer Credit (Agreements and Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) (Amendment) Regulations 1985.

See here --> The Consumer Credit (Agreements and Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) (Amendment) Regulations 1985

In a nutshell, the easiest way of describing this would be to say that the act (originally enacted in 1983) allows for a lender to issue a recon. Anything before this date (19th May 1985) would not need to be dealt with by a creditor as technically talking the act was not there allowing them to issue a recon was it, so how could they? The act changed effective 19th May 1985 whereby any agreement after this date can be supplied using the merits of The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983/5 - ie allowing the creditor to create a recon. Anything prior to this, the creditor can literally write and say to you "we do not have a copy, sorry".

Hope that makes sense - original here --> The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983

Hi mate, Don't want to hi jack this but its a moot point that has been raised I would have thought. Pre May1985 or 1984 whichever it is I agree they do not have to conform to s78 requests, but the real issue then becomes enforcement surely? I have tried to get resolutions to this a number of times they surely cannot enforce on a post enactment agreement but pre May1985 without the original document basing their claim on any old c**k they decide to dream up on the day they draw up the claim form? (selfishly remembering that one of ours probably falls into this bracket) LOL!

regards
G

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Account terminated

Hi mate, Don't want to hi jack this but its a moot point that has been raised I would have thought. Pre May1985 or 1984 whichever it is I agree they do not have to conform to s78 requests, but the real issue then becomes enforcement surely? I have tried to get resolutions to this a number of times they surely cannot enforce on a post enactment agreement but pre May1985 without the original document basing their claim on any old c**k they decide to dream up on the day they draw up the claim form? (selfishly remembering that one of ours probably falls into this bracket) LOL!

regards
G

It's officially 19th May 1985 that it is classed from mate

There is a thread where we discussed this in detail, it may be greymatter or oldgrey's thread - deffo an old (amex/barclays?) account from the 70's or something - Paul had a bit to say which explained it in detail....

Edit - it was oldaccess --> allaboutFORUMS

[Deepie]

Re: Account terminated

It's officially 19th May 1985 that it is classed from mate

There is a thread where we discussed this in detail, it may be greymatter or oldgrey's thread - deffo an old (amex/barclays?) account from the 70's or something - Paul had a bit to say which explained it in detail....

Edit - it was oldaccess --> allaboutFORUMS

And Greymatter's from about page 150 onwards ----> Greymatter's ue Diary

[garlok]

Re: Account terminated

Thanks guys I will settle down for a read as this has always bugged me aside from this thread.

regards
G