Gregco UE diary

[ScabHunter]

Re: Gregco UE diary

Also can someone confirm the statute barred, as he was under the impression that as long as THEY sent 1 letter within a 6 year period than the debt would still be enforceable and I was like I think as long as you've not acknowledged the debt / contacted them in 6 years it becomes statute barred??

Bloody hell! If that is the standard of the "advice" they give, you'd be better off consulting the lamppost outside their office.

If that was true, no alleged debt would ever go SB. No, it has to be a payment made by you, or someone acting with your explicit authority, or a written acknowledgement by yourself of the alleged debt. Nothing else can restart the limitation clock.

SH

[gregco]

Re: Gregco UE diary

I have received various communication stating they are investigating the request and will get back to me when they have further information.
Is this the usual course of action they send when they have nothing or do you think I can expect more payment requests and final demands again in the near future.

I was wondering If I should be sending out another template letter to them to 'finalize' this as due dates have expired, or is that kicking the hornets nest unduly?

[Deepie]

Re: Gregco UE diary

I have received various communication stating they are investigating the request and will get back to me when they have further information.
Is this the usual course of action they send when they have nothing or do you think I can expect more payment requests and final demands again in the near future.

I was wondering If I should be sending out another template letter to them to 'finalize' this as due dates have expired, or is that kicking the hornets nest unduly?

Best just to sit and wait....... see what they do next.

[gregco]

Re: Gregco UE diary

***8226; Type of account credit card HSBC
***8226; Date commenced Feb 2006
***8226; Approx balance £2755 although before charges etc £2472
***8226; Date last paid July 2011
***8226; not paying
***8226; Status default
***8226; Account owner Central Debt Recovery Unit
***8226; Has PPI

Metro just confirmed account being refereed to Buchanan & Wells

Have sent them the Dispute letter recorded delivery Today.

Best just to sit and wait....... see what they do next.

Metropbox have referred the account again!! this time to Buchanan I suppose I'll just wait till they re-send the welcome pack and send them the 'sold' in dispute letter?

[MrsD]

Re: Gregco UE diary

yup!

[gregco]

Re: Gregco UE diary

Yes but that's what opus have sent THEIR terms with. Those terms are irrelevant to the original ones.

Basically you need a copy of the terms as supplied by Citi at account inception. I'd send the missing PT's template at this stage.

I'm sending the Missing Prescribed Terms Template..( Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | CCA Query - Missing Prescribed Terms ) Although, I've edited it to read a little more appropriate to my particular requirements. I basically deleted the paragraph about readable copies and a lot of the missing terms, they will get the idea I'm not accepting the copy they have sent!! Just need to get my darn printer to work!!!!

If its the Opus agreement then its UE as you never took anything out with Opus; Opus literally purchased Citi's accounts.

We need the copy of Citi's agreement. Rest assured Opus' version will be nothing like the original one you signed with Citi and although then can send a current set of terms, they need to be accompanied by the original set that Citi issued.

Just received a letter from Moon Bee; .. ... Our client looks forward to receiving £xxx within 16 days of the date of this letter. You can pay using these methods: xxx, ... ... , you may contact our client to discuss possible repayment options by letter, or phone. Our client looks forward to hearing from you.

I sent the missing PT template on the 8th, and this letter is dated 8th. Also I sent mine to Con collectors, and this is from moonies..Shall I send a copy of the missing PT to moonies??

[MrsD]

Re: Gregco UE diary

yup!

[gregco]

Re: Gregco UE diary

Received a letter from con collections stating ' we attempted to resolve this matter via correspondence and telephone' We're disappointed that we've failed to settle the matter.......
We're forwarding the account to moon beaver.......'

Should I wait till i receive a welcome pack from Moon shine solicitors and follow up with a sold in dispute??

Yes but that's what opus have sent THEIR terms with. Those terms are irrelevant to the original ones.

Basically you need a copy of the terms as supplied by Citi at account inception. I'd send the missing PT's template at this stage.

Just received a letter from Moon Bee; .. ... Our client looks forwsrd to receiving £xxx within 16 days of the date of this letter. You can pay using thses methods: xxx, ... ... , you may contact our client to discuss possible repayment options by letter, or phone. Our clinet looks forward to hearing from you.

I sent the missing PT template on the 8th, and this letter is dated 8th. Also I sent mine to Con collectors, and this is from moonies..Shall I send a copy of the missing PT to moonies??

See reply below:
We write further to your 09 January 2013 letter, in relation to the above matter.
It is noted that you are not satisfied that we have complied with our obligations under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ("the Act"), we would like to take this opportunity to clarify our position.
We would like to explain that Section 78 of the Act provides that, where a creditor receives a Section 78 request, the creditor shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (and any document referred to in it) and a statement of account.
Copy of the executed agreement
The obligations conferred on a creditor by Section 78 of the Act are limited by regulation 3 of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 (the "CNC Regulations"). Regulation 3 of the CNC Regulations sets out various things that may be omitted from a copy agreement provided to the debtor. In material part, Regulation 3 states:
"(1) Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety and any provision of the Act should be a true copy thereof.
There may be omitted from any such copy-
[.....]
(b) Any signature box, signature or date of signature.. ".
It is therefore clear that a creditor is not required under Section 78 of the Act to provide a copy of the agreement bearing the signatures of the parties. This was confirmed by his Honour Judge Waksman QC in Carey v HSBC [2009) EWHC 3417 (QB).
The case of Carey v HSBC also confirmed that a creditor can comply with Section 78 of the Act by providing a reconstituted copy of the agreement which consist of a full set of the terms and condition applicable at the date the agreement was entered into and the following (to the extent that they are not included in the copy terms and conditions provided):
(a) Heading: Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act
1974 or Credit Card Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974;
(b) Name and Address of the debtor;
(c) Name and address of the creditor; and
(d) Cancellation clause applicable to the executed agreement.
This information was enclosed with our 08 November 2012 letter.
Statement of the terms of the agreement as varied
Regulation 7 of the CNC Regulations provides that, where an agreement has been varied in accordance with section 82(1) of the Act (as is the case with your credit agreement) every copy of the executed agreement give to the debtor by the creditor shall include either a copy of the latest notice of variation for each term that has been varied or an easily legible statement of the terms as varied.
An easily legible statement of the terms as varied has been provided to you.
Statement of account
A statement of account showing the state of the account, the amount currently payable by you under the agreement was provided to you in our 08 November 2012 letter.
Compliance with Section 61 of the Act
To the extent that you seek to allege that the copy agreement provided does not comply with Section 61 of the Act and is therefore improperly executed, this is misconceived. We refer you to paragraph 230 of Carey v HSBC which states that "it is insufficient, without more, to the point to the absence of a signed, or any proper s78 copy as a foundation for a plea of an [improperly executed agreement]".
For the avoidance of doubt, we believe you credit agreement to be fully compliant with the Act and any allegations that it is not will be opposed.
We trust that that this letter has addressed your concerns about the documents provided in response to the Section 78 request. As our response meets the requirements of the Act, we look forward to receiving your proposals for repayment by return post.

[gregco]

Re: Gregco UE diary

Any one have any ideas about this reply, It makes me think im on another loosing streak...All replies welcome!

See reply below:
We write further to your 09 January 2013 letter, in relation to the above matter.
It is noted that you are not satisfied that we have complied with our obligations under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ("the Act"), we would like to take this opportunity to clarify our position.
We would like to explain that Section 78 of the Act provides that, where a creditor receives a Section 78 request, the creditor shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (and any document referred to in it) and a statement of account.
Copy of the executed agreement
The obligations conferred on a creditor by Section 78 of the Act are limited by regulation 3 of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 (the "CNC Regulations"). Regulation 3 of the CNC Regulations sets out various things that may be omitted from a copy agreement provided to the debtor. In material part, Regulation 3 states:
"(1) Subject to the following provisions of these Regulations, every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument or other document referred to in the Act and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety and any provision of the Act should be a true copy thereof.
There may be omitted from any such copy-
[.....]
(b) Any signature box, signature or date of signature.. ".
It is therefore clear that a creditor is not required under Section 78 of the Act to provide a copy of the agreement bearing the signatures of the parties. This was confirmed by his Honour Judge Waksman QC in Carey v HSBC [2009) EWHC 3417 (QB).
The case of Carey v HSBC also confirmed that a creditor can comply with Section 78 of the Act by providing a reconstituted copy of the agreement which consist of a full set of the terms and condition applicable at the date the agreement was entered into and the following (to the extent that they are not included in the copy terms and conditions provided):
(a) Heading: Credit Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act
1974 or Credit Card Agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974;
(b) Name and Address of the debtor;
(c) Name and address of the creditor; and
(d) Cancellation clause applicable to the executed agreement.
This information was enclosed with our 08 November 2012 letter.
Statement of the terms of the agreement as varied
Regulation 7 of the CNC Regulations provides that, where an agreement has been varied in accordance with section 82(1) of the Act (as is the case with your credit agreement) every copy of the executed agreement give to the debtor by the creditor shall include either a copy of the latest notice of variation for each term that has been varied or an easily legible statement of the terms as varied.
An easily legible statement of the terms as varied has been provided to you.
Statement of account
A statement of account showing the state of the account, the amount currently payable by you under the agreement was provided to you in our 08 November 2012 letter.
Compliance with Section 61 of the Act
To the extent that you seek to allege that the copy agreement provided does not comply with Section 61 of the Act and is therefore improperly executed, this is misconceived. We refer you to paragraph 230 of Carey v HSBC which states that "it is insufficient, without more, to the point to the absence of a signed, or any proper s78 copy as a foundation for a plea of an [improperly executed agreement]".
For the avoidance of doubt, we believe you credit agreement to be fully compliant with the Act and any allegations that it is not will be opposed.
We trust that that this letter has addressed your concerns about the documents provided in response to the Section 78 request. As our response meets the requirements of the Act, we look forward to receiving your proposals for repayment by return post.

[Deepie]

Re: Gregco UE diary

Any one have any ideas about this reply, It makes me think im on another loosing streak...All replies welcome!

I would send this if it were me----> CCA Query - Creditor Refusal to Accept UE Status

[gregco]

Re: Gregco UE diary

Hey, I need some clarification before I continue this disagreement, as I'm confused. The post above says they have replied with confirmation they have satisfied the s78 requests and provided a true copy of the initial agreement, However Niddy has provisionally confirmed that it's unenforceable 'IF its the Opus agreement' .....I'm not so certain it is the Opus agreement, as stated below and on the heading 'Its the Citi agreement'
I have received an agreement headed CITi, and an agreement with Opus on it, that's why I'm confused as i looks to me as they have included the initial Citi agreement.

I have E-Mailed Niddy the copies.

So before I demand that they acknowledge that its truly UE I just wanted to clarify that IF thanks.

its the city agreement...0022 - Citi & bmibaby Cards 11 01 2008

This agreement is between us,
Citi Financial Europe plc ond you

If its the Opus agreement then its UE as you never took anything out with Opus; Opus literally purchased Citi's accounts.

We need the copy of Citi's agreement. Rest assured Opus' version will be nothing like the original one you signed with Citi and although then can send a current set of terms, they need to be accompanied by the original set that Citi issued.

Yes but that's what opus have sent THEIR terms with. Those terms are irrelevant to the original ones.

Basically you need a copy of the terms as supplied by Citi at account inception. I'd send the missing PT's template at this stage.

[gregco]

Re: Gregco UE diary

Hi

Any further info about this CITI/Opus stance???

Hey, I need some clarification before I continue this disagreement, as I'm confused. The post above says they have replied with confirmation they have satisfied the s78 requests and provided a true copy of the initial agreement, However Niddy has provisionally confirmed that it's unenforceable 'IF its the Opus agreement' .....I'm not so certain it is the Opus agreement, as stated below and on the heading 'Its the Citi agreement'
I have received an agreement headed CITi, and an agreement with Opus on it, that's why I'm confused as i looks to me as they have included the initial Citi agreement.

I have E-Mailed Niddy the copies.

So before I demand that they acknowledge that its truly UE I just wanted to clarify that IF thanks.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Gregco UE diary

Mate

You sent me two attachments agreed?

The first, titled: credit agreement CITI.pdf is literally a copy of the PT's on a print out, this by itself does not comply with s,78 let alone satisfy it. So we then move on to the second attachment entitled: response to s78 and current Opus agreement.pdf is clearly an Opus recon - the very first paragraph tells you that:

The parties to this Agreement are Progressive Credit Limited, 11 Tower View, Kings Hill, West Mailing, Kent, ME19 4RL

Progressive Credit is Opus owners. Its nothing to do with Citi

You have not been sent relevant s.78 so they are in default. Hence this is the correct template to send out: --> Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | CCA Query - Creditor Refusal to Accept UE Status

At the present time this is

[gregco]

Re: Gregco UE diary

Thank you Niddy,
yes 2 attachments only

Just waiting for the Post Office to open, and I'll get that template away to them.

[gregco]

Re: Left it too Late? 2 Court Claims received

I've received a welcome letter from Buchananananananan, basically please pay and we find no reason why not, I'll follow previous advise and fire off a response, and include the original request...[ Overdrafts - CCA Information - allaboutFORUMS ]

This has been transferred to Wescot Who've sent a Notice of Debt Collection letter...Should I fire off the CCA OD req to them, or the second part, or sold in dispute?!?As its OD. Or just put it in the Filing cabinet.

Metropbox have referred the account again!! this time to Buchanan I suppose I'll just wait till they re-send the welcome pack and send them the 'sold' in dispute letter?

***8226; Type of account Current Account Overdraft HSBC
***8226; Date commenced Pre Feb 2004
***8226; Approx balance £886 although before charges etc £800
***8226; Date last paid Aug 2011
***8226; not paying
***8226; Status default
***8226; Account owner Central Debt recovery unit

25/1/13 Received a letter from Buchanan please contact us to pay.