Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

[happy_bunny]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Hi P1,

I sent the letter you helped with and they came back with this......

"We acknowledge receipt of your letter and have referred the matter back to Cabot. Once we receive further instruction, we will be in further contact".

Nothing for a week or 2, then........

"In response to your letter dated....xxx. (the one you did for me, and to which they replied above). We confirm that as previously advised, by providing you with a copy of your original credit agreement (which it's not as it's not available) on date xx, we satisfied our obligation under the cca1974. Under the cca1974, there is no obligation for us to provide you with a signed copy of the agreement.

Pls make payment by date xx blah blah. If not, we have been instructed by our client to issue proceedings"

RBS and whoever collects for them have been doing the same with me.

The one sent in response to my CCA request is clearly UE and they don't have the original, but they won't admit it. they just keep saying the request was satisfied.

HB

[thechippy]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

They're skating around the issues Chippy.... I've messaged you.

.....And replied.

You are a genuine star P1.............

[PriorityOne]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

They're skating around the issues Chippy.... I've messaged you.

[thechippy]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Hi P1,

I sent the letter you helped with and they came back with this......

"We acknowledge receipt of your letter and have referred the matter back to Cabot. Once we receive further instruction, we will be in further contact".

Nothing for a week or 2, then........

"In response to your letter dated....xxx. (the one you did for me, and to which they replied above). We confirm that as previously advised, by providing you with a copy of your original credit agreement (which it's not as it's not available) on date xx, we satisfied our obligation under the cca1974. Under the cca1974, there is no obligation for us to provide you with a signed copy of the agreement.

Pls make payment by date xx blah blah. If not, we have been instructed by our client to issue proceedings"

[PriorityOne]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Can you quote the letter or scan it up please Chippy? Block out your details first though.

Thanks....

[thechippy]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Well,

They are having none of it. Despite everything under the sun and it's dog being pointed out, in their opinion they have satisfied my request and again, threatening legal action.
As before, there is no original agreement available and they've been made aware that to litigate the original is required. What I have been sent was just current Opus terms and doubtful to be accurate by a country mile. Not only that, I've never had an Opus card. The Citi accounts were sold to them and no new card was forthcoming anyway.

[PriorityOne]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

You're welcome.....

[thechippy]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Replied with a letter that PriorityOne was kind enough to draft for me and the account has been referred back pending instructions...

Thanks P1, you're a star...........

[PriorityOne]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

a s78 defence is only effective whilst the request for the agreement is not satisfied. As soon as they send the correct documents the defence disappears. If they send it next month then this month the agreement is unenforceable but from the day you receive it next month it becomes enforceable again.

you have got Carey tyhe wrong way round. It says pretty much the opposite of what you have suggested. If the original is missing/destroyed they can reconstitute a version of what you would have signed provided it is accurate.

That might satisfy the information purpose but not the proof purpose..... If that's not challenged however, companies may assume that people know no different and press ahead with court action.

[ATW]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Thanks Andrew,

Just had a read through that.

So,

If they do finally manage to get a recon together which is actually correct, does that mean they could enforce??
Notwithstanding that, if the original agreement is not available, how can they prove beyond any doubt the recon is correct?

I was under the impression after Carey that if a copy of the original agreement is not available, that was a complete defense and they can't enforce - or have I misunderstood?

Also, after a quick look around the net, it seems Cabot / Weightmans are deffo litigating on these accounts - found a few examples from just this month!!
Looks like they are taking a chance, although on a couple of them it looks like people have only carried out a cca request and cpr 31.14 upon receipt of the claim form...I'm ahead on that I suppose.

By the way Andrew, I've emailed you..

a s78 defence is only effective whilst the request for the agreement is not satisfied. As soon as they send the correct documents the defence disappears. If they send it next month then this month the agreement is unenforceable but from the day you receive it next month it becomes enforceable again.

you have got Carey tyhe wrong way round. It says pretty much the opposite of what you have suggested. If the original is missing/destroyed they can reconstitute a version of what you would have signed provided it is accurate.

[thechippy]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Hi PlanB,

It's circa 8.5K and maybe 18 months from SB, so probably why they are having a push.

I wasn't chasing Andrew, we all need a break.
More interested in getting some comments on the other..

[PlanB]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

You posted this at 9.30 pm last night

By the way Andrew, I've emailed you..

so maybe it's a bit soon to expect a reply especially over the weekend.

Anyone?

Cheeky bump....

How much is the debt - you've not said? They're being very persistent if it's only a tiddly amount.

[thechippy]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Anyone?

Cheeky bump....

[thechippy]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Thanks Andrew,

Just had a read through that.

So,

If they do finally manage to get a recon together which is actually correct, does that mean they could enforce??
Notwithstanding that, if the original agreement is not available, how can they prove beyond any doubt the recon is correct?

I was under the impression after Carey that if a copy of the original agreement is not available, that was a complete defense and they can't enforce - or have I misunderstood?

Also, after a quick look around the net, it seems Cabot / Weightmans are deffo litigating on these accounts - found a few examples from just this month!!
Looks like they are taking a chance, although on a couple of them it looks like people have only carried out a cca request and cpr 31.14 upon receipt of the claim form...I'm ahead on that I suppose.

By the way Andrew, I've emailed you..

[ATW]

Re: Citicard / Opus / Cabot Vs The Chippy

Phoenix v Kotecha was the exact same scenario as yours and is in the Court of Appeal post Carey so it binds them.

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup...method=boolean