Riberaclass UE Diary

[Deepie]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Lloyds c/c no2

Letter from Moorcroft. 'Important information - possible litigation'& carries on with 'to prevent the above possible action please send payment'.

I like an optimist so I'll ignore unless there is a 'go away & don't bother me' letter that you think is worth sending!
regards RL

I would send > Threat by Creditor - Threat-o-Gram Letter Before Action

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Sainsbury's c/c

Received rambling letter from Sains saying they do not agree with my previous letter (quelle suprise!) As I think someone's got a new dictionary I'll send you a copy. It appears they don't want to talk to me any more (sob!)
regards
Rl

Ok send it over please..... This is HBOS though, right?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Lloyds c/c no2

Letter from Moorcroft. 'Important information - possible litigation'& carries on with 'to prevent the above possible action please send payment'.

I like an optimist so I'll ignore unless there is a 'go away & don't bother me' letter that you think is worth sending!
regards RL

I would send this now: Threat by Creditor - Threat-o-Gram Letter Before Action

[Riberaclass]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Sainsbury's c/c

Received rambling letter from Sains saying they do not agree with my previous letter (quelle suprise!) As I think someone's got a new dictionary I'll send you a copy. It appears they don't want to talk to me any more (sob!)
regards
Rl

[Riberaclass]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Lloyds c/c no2

Letter from Moorcroft. 'Important information - possible litigation'& carries on with 'to prevent the above possible action please send payment'.

I like an optimist so I'll ignore unless there is a 'go away & don't bother me' letter that you think is worth sending!
regards RL

[Deepie]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

M+S c/c

Received odd letter from Wescot. Basically they have had an audit & note that correspondence has been received. They then say this has not been actioned & they cannot locate it. They then request 'please contact us with details of the correspondence - we are putting your a/c on hold for 14 dys'. I presume they mean they have lost the last letter sent.
I presume ignore till I hear?
many thanks RL

Yes just ignore

[Riberaclass]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

M+S c/c

Received odd letter from Wescot. Basically they have had an audit & note that correspondence has been received. They then say this has not been actioned & they cannot locate it. They then request 'please contact us with details of the correspondence - we are putting your a/c on hold for 14 dys'. I presume they mean they have lost the last letter sent.
I presume ignore till I hear?
many thanks RL

[Riberaclass]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Loyds c/c no2

After 2 letters from Moorcroft saying 'we are looking into your queries' ??
they have now written to say they have been in touch with Lloyds who have advised that they have never received a CCA request or the £1 fee! As they replied to the CCA request within 10days of it being sent I'm not sure what they are talking about. Shall I ignore & see what they send next?
many thanks RL

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Sainsbury's c/c

Hi Nidd, The letter from Nov had a staple in because the so called 'agreement' had been attached to it. The letter from May had no staples because the 'agreement' page was not attached , just enclosed in the same envelope. The one from Nov says they are enclosing 'a copy of the original signed application form' & the one in May says they enclose 'a copy of your reconstituted version of the executed agreement'.

Shall I send the CCA query letter??
many thanks RL

Hiya

You need to kinda blag it for as long as you can yes, so send the letter as directed in last post to buy time/see their next move!

[Riberaclass]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Sainsbury's c/c

Hi Nidd, The letter from Nov had a staple in because the so called 'agreement' had been attached to it. The letter from May had no staples because the 'agreement' page was not attached , just enclosed in the same envelope. The one from Nov says they are enclosing 'a copy of the original signed application form' & the one in May says they enclose 'a copy of your reconstituted version of the executed agreement'.

Shall I send the CCA query letter??
many thanks RL

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

This is weird, they are both the same copies but they both have differences which don't explain each other. For instance one shows a staple mark in top left corner, the other doesn't - how so? The one with the staple mark was sent 7 months earlier than the one that now does not - in the first letter they cleverly try to make it look like they have sent a copy of the original (breaching OFT guidelines as it is a lie) - however read it again and it really says its a copy of the original showing a signature, they could have added that signature at any point using cut/paste from any other source.

I say it is

Then you go to the most recent version, it's the same yet they declare this a full recon - so summat aint quite right, ergo we have to classify this is unenforceable and so respond with this: CCA Query - Application Form Received

[Riberaclass]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Sainsbury's c/c

not a problem!!

regards RL

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Sainsbury's c/c

Hi Nidd - have sent you copy letters from Nov 10 & May/June 11.

regards RL

Thanks - I'll check later bear with me

[Riberaclass]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Sainsbury's c/c

Hi Nidd - have sent you copy letters from Nov 10 & May/June 11.

regards RL

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Riberaclass UE Diary

Sainsbury's c/c

Yes it is

RL

buggery - ok, so not good news. I suspect they are both copies, can you recall from the covering letter whether the dca states it is a copy? Even better if you could send me a copy of both covering letters

I think they have been copied / pasted but the thing is right now they are enforceable by the fact the PT's show and they are signed, however we can always look at the issuance of DN and NoA etc to find fault.