jonesyd UE Diary

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Cahoot

Cahoot
Agreement from April 04, 4K balance on a 6K limit.

2011:
January: lose patience, send SAR - ask NID for advice on the CCA received

This is also a bodge job (as most Cahoot stuff) so you can stick with your initial thoughts which are the missing right to cancel, signature and no terms - however for clarity, you ought to respond with this: ---> CCA Query - Missing Prescribed Terms

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Capital One

Capital One

Agreement from Jul 05, 1.8K balance on a 2.5K limit.

January: ask NID for advice on the CCA data received thus far

This one is enforceable i'm afraid - its just "too recent" and everything seems to be there. I'd not pay yet, it's too small a debt to go jumping in with offers - i'd consider ignoring them and then let me know (update this thread) when they write and we'll just deal with each letter ad hoc.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: M&S Money

M&S Money

Nothing received regards to M&S - please email it again?

Thanks

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: NatWest

NatWest
2011:
Jan ask NID for advice on the CCA data received thus far

This is unenforceable - send this: ---> CCA Query - Copy Document Supplied

It's obviously not the original and where is your siggy? That could be anything, ie something they typed up this morning - for all you know!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: the remainder

Barclaycard:
Commenced in 1998 (guess), Balance of 3K on a 5k limit. Went through much the same routine as the above, but for:
- continually decline to supply any kind of true copy
- a flurry of Mercers (in house DCA) letters
- no Default Notices
- in December, they eventually concede they do not currently have access to the original agreement and are thus prevented from enforcing
- the next day Calders (other in house DCA) send a letter offering to settle for 40% of the outstanding amount
- am waiting for the next offer.

Note the bold red highlight above?

In such cases, keep this letter safe and if anyone hassles you then you photocopy it and send it along with one of these: ---> CCA Query - Letter Previously Confirming No CCA

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: the remainder

Lloyds Mastercard
Commenced in 1991 (guess), Balance of 4K on a 7k limit. Went through much the same routine as the above, but for:
- sent (separately) 2 pretend true copies, but they were both for other (different!) people, the clots!
- flurry of Arrears Notices
- no Default Notices
- a few SCM (in house law firm) letters
- lose patience and SAR in Jan 11.

Citi/Opus
Commenced in 2003 (guess), Balance of 2K on a 4k limit. Went through much the same routine as the above, but for:
- Citi were hopeless, did not respond until Sep, and only then to say they'd been sold to Opus - cheers!
- in Dec, Opus respond the original CCA with 10 pages of current Ts&Cs, no signatures, no dates, nothing
- am waiting for a "proper" CCA - could be a long one, I know.


The 4th I have an irrational affection for:

Partnership Card:
Commenced in 1999 (guess), Balance of 7K on a 8k limit.
I'm a bit reluctant to do anything with them - provided what looks like a decent CCA and they agreed to open-ended token payments and froze interest as soon as I asked, with no I&E request. Still going.

It appears you're in control on there so i'll leave you with them.....

[jonesyd]

Re: Virgin/MBNA

This is unenforceable as it is simply a short application with restricted terms and most importantly it is illegible. You should respond with this: ---> CCA Query - Application Form Received

However, that said I am more interested right now in the highlighted line above - what was wrong with the DN and what happened there? I'd like to see the DN if poss - we can use that as additional fight if they try court!

Apologies - I should have been clearer. The DN from MBNA is a "pretend" one - a simple demand that happens to be titled, in CAPs, "IMPORTANT DEFAULT NOTIFICATION", from the fantastically-named Mr Martin Supple, Head of Customer Assistance.

In any case, I've assumed all along that a DN would be prima facie invalid if I had already notified the Lender that the material they had supplied in response to my CCA was clearly non-compliant. True?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: jonesyd saga

Nope don't think so deep into your legal background. If a debt is ue (or lender messes up s.78) then all it means is no action should be taken. The fact most do take some form of internal action, ie assign it, default it etc is perfectly fine.

So yes a default can be added if you broke the terms of your contract regardless of whether they satisfied your s.78 request. Remember case law beats these silly acts and lately case law is winning. Put simply you'd be nuts to try and argue invalid dn due to lack of s.78 compliance.

[jonesyd]

Re: the remainder

It appears you're in control on there so i'll leave you with them.....

Can I press you on the Partnership CCA doc - I'm not planning to fight them, but it would be good to know if the CCA is valid or not if they suddenly turn nasty. (Which I know they may well, at some point. I'm not naive enough to think the Partnership people are nicer than everyone else because they are connected to John Lewis.) Partnership is HFC, which is HSBC, isn't it?

[jonesyd]

Re: jonesyd saga

Nope don't think so deep into your legal background. If a debt is ue (or lender messes up s.78) then all it means is no action should be taken. The fact most do take some form of internal action, ie assign it, default it etc is perfectly fine.

So yes a default can be added if you broke the terms of your contract regardless of whether they satisfied your s.78 request. Remember case law beats these silly acts and lately case law is winning. Put simply you'd be nuts to try and argue invalid dn due to lack of s.78 compliance.

OK, maybe I've misunderstood. If they have not complied with my s.78 request (either by sending nothing or nonsense), doesn't this come into play:

"Whilst this account remains in dispute, you will know that the law (including the Administration of Justice Act 1970) and other relevant regulations dictate the following:

• You cannot register any data with a third party;"

I mean, in the sense that a Default cannot be registered with Credit Ref Agency? I'm not bothered about what the Lender reports internally, I just don't want them erroneously reporting outside their four walls.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: jonesyd saga

OK, maybe I've misunderstood. If they have not complied with my s.78 request (either by sending nothing or nonsense), doesn't this come into play:

"Whilst this account remains in dispute, you will know that the law (including the Administration of Justice Act 1970) and other relevant regulations dictate the following:

• You cannot register any data with a third party;"

I mean, in the sense that a Default cannot be registered with Credit Ref Agency? I'm not bothered about what the Lender reports internally, I just don't want them erroneously reporting outside their four walls.

It doesn't matter how you or I read them, there will still be a default registered cos you breached the terms of your agreement and unless you took them to court for removal, you have no real right to argue it.

This is the thing, stop reading too much into it and relate to case law - which does seem to be overruling basic common sense lately. I'm trying to say that the CCA also says that no action will be taken on a debt whereby the agreement is not compliant, then Carey case the judge said "oooh we can't have that, I know - lets merge the Copy Documents Act into the CCA and allow blatant copies/made up/fabrications"

Its a joke....!!

[jonesyd]

Re: jonesyd saga

With one eye on my plans to leave the UK in June, I'm now thinking of writing to the lenders that Niddy has confirmed as UE with F&FS letters along the following lines. Please feel free to add your comments, suggestions, etc.




"

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

RE: account XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Either

Thank you for your letter dated xxx, in which you acknowledge that you are unable to provide the documentation required under s.78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the CCA 1974) for the above accounts and that they are thus unenforceable at law. The additional contents are noted.

or

The documentation you have supplied under s.78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the CCA 1974) is manifestly non-compliant and the above account is thus unenforceable at law.

then

In normal circumstances, I would ask you to write-off the alleged debts and also confirm that no further action will be taken, that the accounts are now closed and that no further correspondence will take place. However, I will shortly be permanently leaving the UK and wish to bring all my affairs to order before I leave. So, whilst I admit to no liability for the above accounts, I wish to make an offer to resolve matters amicably: I propose to offer a full and final payment to settle and close the above accounts to the value of 5% of the balances as at xxx (date s.78 request first sent), conditional only upon the following:

• any Default Notices relating to the account will be removed;
• the Status of the account on any paperwork or relevant credit report will change from “Defaulted” to “Settled”;
• the Current Balance field on any paperwork or relevant credit report will appear as £0.00;
• any Default/Delinquent Balance field on any paperwork or relevant credit report will be set to £0.00;
• there will be no date in the “Defaulted Date” field on any paperwork or relevant credit report (as it will have been removed);
• there will be no date in the “Date Last Delinquent” field on any paperwork or relevant credit report;
• these actions will apply to all 3 Credit Reference Agencies, namely: (i) Experian, (ii) Equifax and (iii) Call Credit.

This offer is made on the clear understanding that, if accepted, neither you nor any associate company will take any other action to enforce or pursue this debt in any way whatsoever and that I will be released from any and all liability relating to it. If you accept my proposal, please respond confirming each of the above points on official letter-headed paper, confirming the exact amount owing, and I will send a cheque by return.

I look forward to your response.

Yours faithfully, "

[jonesyd]

Re: jonesyd saga

It doesn't matter how you or I read them, there will still be a default registered cos you breached the terms of your agreement and unless you took them to court for removal, you have no real right to argue it.

This is the thing, stop reading too much into it and relate to case law - which does seem to be overruling basic common sense lately. I'm trying to say that the CCA also says that no action will be taken on a debt whereby the agreement is not compliant, then Carey case the judge said "oooh we can't have that, I know - lets merge the Copy Documents Act into the CCA and allow blatant copies/made up/fabrications"

Its a joke....!!

Hmmm...that's a nuisance. My only real motivation in settling these accounts (if they are manifestly UE) by minimal F&FS is to clean up my credit file (see my template F&FS letter). This makes me wonder if it is worth bothering.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: jonesyd saga

Hmmm...that's a nuisance. My only real motivation in settling these accounts (if they are manifestly UE) by minimal F&FS is to clean up my credit file (see my template F&FS letter). This makes me wonder if it is worth bothering.

You're best letting them ride out the 6yr period and then starting again, why offer to settle on an UE debt? the lender will also pick up on this and realise you're "an easy target" and hound you some more.

If it's UE then let them take the fight to you, and you defend it (using templates). If you're leaving UK in June, then just wait til then and move - no? Just get up and go!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: jonesyd saga

With one eye on my plans to leave the UK in June, I'm now thinking of writing to the lenders that Niddy has confirmed as UE with F&FS letters along the following lines. Please feel free to add your comments, suggestions, etc.

See my post above, also you shouldn't use "Without Prejudice" as this stops your offer being used in any defence, by you, in court - based on the fact a judgment against you will be stayed if you can prove you tried to negotiate, i'd suggest not doing this yet and seeing what happens in due course - see what and how they come back to your standard responses first.....

Take stock at the end of it all, then consider any offers then - right at the end. In the meantime, you ought to consider including the last 4 accounts as it's pointless being loyal to the partnership - when they see the default data etc come through (via monthly feeds) they will soon restrict/cancel the account - so it's really pointless staying loyal to one company!

As an ex barrister (albeit an extremely young one) you should know most of what i'm saying....