Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

Ok.... a suggested scenario then....

Waksman stated that recon. agreements were ok for current information purposes (copy docs. in response a to s78 request) but not for proof purposes (s61). The proof purpose does not underlie a s78 request (he said).

So... and Paul touched on this earlier, if a debtor says for example, that (even though he/she has been using a credit card for years) he/she never actually signed an agreement (s61), the creditor will need to find the original in order to deal with the proof purpose.

So..... in a nutshell, wait for them to instigate legal action (if that's the intention) and if you are SURE there is no executed agreement, defend on the grounds of s61 and that a recon. is not proof (purpose) that s61 was complied with.

I know that not every case is as simple as this though.....

[Paul.]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

Ok.... a suggested scenario then....

Waksman stated that recon. agreements were ok for current information purposes (copy docs. in response a to s78 request) but not for proof purposes (s61). The proof purpose does not underlie a s78 request (he said).

So... and Paul touched on this earlier, if a debtor says for example, that (even though he/she has been using a credit card for years) he/she never actually signed an agreement (s61), the creditor will need to find the original in order to deal with the proof purpose.

So..... in a nutshell, wait for them to instigate legal action (if that's the intention) and if you are SURE there is no executed agreement, defend on the grounds of s61 and that a recon. is not proof (purpose) that s61 was complied with.

I know that not every case is as simple as this though.....

or you could hit them with a reply to the letter of claim per the Pre action protocol practice direction for a copy of the agreement which they will rely on within the proceedings

that may also add strength to your case

[MrsD]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

thick Mod no 2 here

So are you saying if someone is sure they haven't signed a credit agreement, we should have a template telling em that early on?

I'm thinking in terms of things like the M&S storecard to creditcard scenario or when they have sent an out an out forgery (we've got one of each of these)

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

or you could hit them with a reply to the letter of claim per the Pre action protocol practice direction for a copy of the agreement which they will rely on within the proceedings

that may also add strength to your case

Oh goodey.... the barstewards may not have us just yet then!!

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

thick Mod no 2 here

So are you saying if someone is sure they haven't signed a credit agreement, we should have a template telling em that early on?

I'm thinking in terms of things like the M&S storecard to creditcard scenario or when they have sent an out an out forgery (we've got one of each of these)

That may be an idea.... the strength is in the pre-court battle and trying to see them off early.

IMO, the CPUTR letter can used for this purpose (checking for misleading statements/claims, etc.), providing people remember that it's not a legal request for information.

[MrsD]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

I'm a big believer in using the templates, its working for us. But its always going to be a work in progress so if another template would help establish a few facts, lets go with it.

As Niddy said, case law is constantly changing, so we have to look for the holes in their arguments all the time and respond. UE isn't about confrontation and establishing case law, its about keeping out of the fecking courts!!

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

I'm a big believer in using the templates, its working for us. But its always going to be a work in progress so if another template would help establish a few facts, lets go with it.

As Niddy said, case law is constantly changing, so we have to look for the holes in their arguments all the time and respond. UE isn't about confrontation and establishing case law, its about keeping out of the fecking courts!!

Couldn't agree more....

[helmsman]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

I'm a big believer in using the templates, its working for us. But its always going to be a work in progress so if another template would help establish a few facts, lets go with it.

As Niddy said, case law is constantly changing, so we have to look for the holes in their arguments all the time and respond. UE isn't about confrontation and establishing case law, its about keeping out of the fecking courts!!

Hi All,
This really is interesting and the knowledge you all have is fantastic. AH thats better.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

I hope that made some sense.

[oldyboy]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

Challenging your debts works simply because of all the extra hassle and work involved in dealing with you as opposed to those who don't know anything about UE or the law. Creditors can easily get CCJs willy nilly even without compliant agreements or any agreement at all from all those who don't defend. After all, most people without this knowledge would just admit the debt and that will be that. Unless it's quite obviously not your debt, most people wouldn't think of challenging it.

Good words FP. As in dealing with any bully if you stand up for yourself they usually just slither off and pick on someone else. We just have to remember that by doing that the bully sometimes retaliates. People on DMPs often, it would seem, get CCJ'd because when they turn to their provider they're advised to simply admit! I know it's happened to me!

What we have to keep doing is adapting to the threat posed and re-evaluating our tactics as necessary. All the info posted helps us to do just that. I'm going to stop now before I drivel on with a war rally!

This has been a lively and very interesting thread.

[helmsman]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

Yes you are right but I keep trying, and enjoying all the threads.

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

Hi All,
This really is interesting and the knowledge you all have is fantastic, but I am a bit thick myself so is starting the whole thing off sending cca request then the follow ups missing terms ect no cca cant go to court on some, is this not admissable if god forbids we actually get to court that the O/C can only produce a poor recon or a good one, like someone said we got mailshots application forms thrown willy nilly at us everytime you went into a bank or shop or on a trip abroad ( I know we were not forced to apply but stupidly some of us did). I hope that made some sense.

The best thing people can do is not to over-think their own situations and get carried away with hypothetical scenarios that may never happen

Send that CCA request... yes. What happens after that depends on what you get back (if anything). Post April 2007 accounts are still worth challenging (IMO) with the proof positive argument but, it's all down to timing.... so where a creditor/DCA starts to swear blind that they've supplied all they need to supply in response to a CCA request, that's when I would go in with the PP argument and CPUTR

Having said that, I'm not currently in this situation, so it's easy for me to talk the talk, if you know what I mean.... For people going through it, it's far more stressful

[helmsman]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

The best thing people can do is not to over-think their own situations and get carried away with hypothetical scenarios that may never happen

Send that CCA request... yes. What happens after that depends on what you get back (if anything). Post April 2007 accounts are still worth challenging (IMO) with the proof positive argument but, it's all down to timing.... so where a creditor/DCA starts to swear blind that they've supplied all they need to supply in response to a CCA request, that's when I would go in with the PP argument and CPUTR

Having said that, I'm not currently in this situation, so it's easy for me to talk the talk, if you know what I mean.... For people going through it, it's far more stressful

Hi,
You got to my thread before I deleted it, as Niddy pointed out it did not read what I meant to say doh, but I use all the advice I am Given and respond to dcas ect, and with everybodys help here I am in a much more comfortable position than I was 15 months ago, obviously not wanting to go to court at any time,but if I receive papers on what is deemed U/E I now have a little stash to engage Pauls firm to fight my corner if they think it worth fighting, if it isnt I will just offer what I can afford and add another ccj to my collection and as I never want credit again it dont matter.

[PriorityOne]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

Hi,
You got to my thread before I deleted it, as Niddy pointed out it did not read what I meant to say doh, but I use all the advice I am Given and respond to dcas ect, and with everybodys help here I am in a much more comfortable position than I was 15 months ago, obviously not wanting to go to court at any time,but if I receive papers on what is deemed U/E I now have a little stash to engage Pauls firm to fight my corner if they think it worth fighting, if it isnt I will just offer what I can afford and add another ccj to my collection and as I never want credit again it dont matter.

If these accounts are pre-April 2007 accounts, they're far easier to challenge....

[helmsman]

Re: Challenging Reconstituted Agreements....

If these accounts are pre-April 2007 accounts, they're far easier to challenge....

Hi,
Yep 9 pre 2007 between us, have held them off for 15 months now with 4 admitting no cca cannot enforce. Life is good. (well better anyway).