PriorityOne & CPUTR 2008 (ex P1 CAG CPUTR 2008)

[PriorityOne]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

And another one bites the dust after sending the CPUTR letter!

Received a letter from Lowells stating:



Seamus

Bloody Hell.... even I've not had a definitive response like that one!! Do you think thy're learning???

Brilliant!!!!

[thechippy]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

Just a quickie..

If a lender has not supplied a cca at all, despite reminders and account in dispute letters etc, would you cputr them before they have chance to send a recon, or would you do it after a recon is sent(if that's the route they take)??

[Seamus]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

Just a quickie..

If a lender has not supplied a cca at all, despite reminders and account in dispute letters etc, would you cputr them before they have chance to send a recon, or would you do it after a recon is sent(if that's the route they take)??

I've done it after they sent a recon, letting them know that I know its a recon, so, do you have the original.

Seamus

[PriorityOne]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

Just a quickie..

If a lender has not supplied a cca at all, despite reminders and account in dispute letters etc, would you cputr them before they have chance to send a recon, or would you do it after a recon is sent(if that's the route they take)??

Seamus has already said it (below).... If they send a duff CCA and you tell them and hear no more, then no point asking under CPUTR. If they decide to fob you off with a recon. howeber, then you need to know if they have an original or not and if not, then upon what information were they able to construct that recon?

IME, this normally ties them up in a tight knot...

I've done it after they sent a recon, letting them know that I know its a recon, so, do you have the original.

Seamus

[still looking]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

Yep agree with one of the comments. Used it on Freds thanks to P1's great work on another forum. All have backed off when asked to state have they or have they not. Even got in writing that four of my debts are UE..... but we can still blah de blah de blah and you have a moral duty blah de blah.

[vorwerk]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

I was/am dealing with a DCA who was acting on behalf on mnba. The o/c had sent a blank copy of a Credit Card Application form ( blank apart from my name and address - no other details or sigs they had been blanked out). I had disputed this CCA with the DCA on the grounds it was illegible and improperly executed ( blanked out sigs).

In my last letter to the DCA I included the following:

"I am therefore making a formal request under The Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations (CPUTR) 2008

I require your organisation to provide written confirmation that states clearly whether you or your client currently hold an original signed Consumer Credit Agreement, or whether you do not hold an original signed Consumer Credit Agreement pertaining to this alleged agreement.

For the avoidance of doubt, an original signed Consumer Credit Agreement is just that, not a blank application for credit and neither a reconstructed document from other sources.

Please note that until such times as a legally enforceable, original Consumer Credit Agreement can be produced and a copy sent to me by return, then this letter is not an acknowledgement of any debt.

Please also note that failure to provide a direct answer to this request may be brought before the court, should you decide to ignore the content of this letter and escalate your recovery processes."

That was sent in October last year by recorded delivery, I have not had any response.
However in the past week I ( like so many others!) have recieved a NOA from mnba and globalarrow assigning the debt and saying I should continue to pay the DCA. Now I'm sure the DCA is aware of this NOA, they are also aware of my last letter, which is why I am going to wait for them to contact me again first. Although it does say on the NOA "If you believe that you have recieved this communication in error or that the outstanding balance is incorrect or not owed, please contact ( DCA) with all relevant information asap"
Should I write again to DCA or is the ball still in their court?

[PriorityOne]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

No.... the ball is still in their court. File away and ignore.

If you start getting any written demands for payment, start a new thread and let us know what's been sent.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

Thanks P1!
A nice ( and pleasant) surprise to see you on this forum, and a sensible answer rather than asking me to check if I've checked my cra file, which is all the help people seem to get "on the other side" these days LOL! ;-)

[BBoo]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

I'm loving it!

[alangee]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

When using CPUTR 2008 to confirm if creditor has a copy of the agreement that would satisfy sec 61 and sec 127(3) of CCA1974, can the creditor send you a reconstituted copy as a reply?

Alan

[PriorityOne]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

When using CPUTR 2008 to confirm if creditor has a copy of the agreement that would satisfy sec 61 and sec 127(3) of CCA1974, can the creditor send you a reconstituted copy as a reply?

Alan

They sometimes try.... but it doesn't answer the question of whether they have the original, which is the whole point of using CPUTR; to stop a company from misleading you.

This needs to be pointed out in a subsequent reply.... I normally do this as part of formal complaint. That way, they have to respond to you in some form or another.... in writing....

[vint1954]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

Good to see that you are still going P1, albeit in another place.

Just found my way over here.

I used your letter some months ago with a DCA who had purchased a CC dept. They responded after pressure that it was a photocopy.

I wrote and thanked them for confirming that the original still existed and asked were they aware of the extreme penalties for missleading a debtor under CPUTR.

They must be thinking about it, as they have not written for over a month.

Vint

[nightwatch]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

Hi P1
after asking under CPUTR if lloyds had an original signed copy of our CCA and getting a letter back saying they had nothing to add to their final response letter

have this week had a letter from them pointing out our acount is in arrears and would we please send £12 to bring it upto date

also we have to make sure all futer payments are on time "or else"
havent a clue where the £12 comes from as we havent paid them for 4 months so would be more than that

[PriorityOne]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

Good to see that you are still going P1, albeit in another place.

Just found my way over here.

I used your letter some months ago with a DCA who had purchased a CC dept. They responded after pressure that it was a photocopy.

I wrote and thanked them for confirming that the original still existed and asked were they aware of the extreme penalties for missleading a debtor under CPUTR.

They must be thinking about it, as they have not written for over a month.

Vint

That's brilliant Vint..... glad you're over here too. I wasn't happy about the kind of advice given on CAG and was directed here by someone.... The rest is history.

Hi P1
after asking under CPUTR if lloyds had an original signed copy of our CCA and getting a letter back saying they had nothing to add to their final response letter

have this week had a letter from them pointing out our acount is in arrears and would we please send £12 to bring it upto date

also we have to make sure all futer payments are on time "or else"
havent a clue where the £12 comes from as we havent paid them for 4 months so would be more than that

They said "please"? Says it all.... just file it away.

I still get a Notification of Sums in Arrears from one of mine. They've been sending them every 6 months for the past 3 years; hoping for a response, I assume.

It'll be stat. barred this year.

[jon1965]

Re: CPUTR 2008 Thread

Well it's official I HATE YOU ALL. You confuse the hell out of me

Anyway did someone say that in reality the creditors need to produce the original in court and how original is original?
So if someone receives what appears to be an agreement is it worth using this to find out if they do actually have the original

Talking or Mr "check your CRA file" that and so many others talk so much bollox. On that basis I assume that Niddy using the T word must be a term of endearment