Westham1 UE diary

[Westham1]

Hi,

I have put this email into one post so that there is a better thread




1st Credit
-formerly an Egg Account opened in 2005, transferred to Barclaycard in 2011 or 2012. Defaulted Dec 2014.




Feb 2015 Assignment letter from Barclaycard, and intro from 1st Credit




21st Dec 2016 Financial statement received from 1st credit covering 1/12/2015 - 30/11/2016

May 2017

Letter from 1st Credit which was a copy of the one they sent in 2015 (see post #1).
They also enclosed a cca which they said satisfied my request in the letter I had sent.
However this cca was a copy of an application I made to Barclaycard in 2008., and the t&c's were from the Egg application.
The only account I opened with Barclaycard was the one in 2008 which was closed a couple of years ago with no issues.





8th June 2017
Another letter from 1st Credit threatening that County Court proceedings are being considered and that I need to contact them within 10 days (letter dated 2nd June).




13th June 2017

I sent a LBA letter to 1st Credit which was signed for today.




14th June 2017

Discount letter from 1st Credit - ignored



1st July 2017, 20:28
Reply from 1st Credit to my lba.
They said
"We can confirm that a copy of the agreement and copy statements were issued to you previously. With regard to the DOA we would refer youto section 136 of the Law of Property act 1925. which provides that the debtor is notified of the assignment of debt in writing, which we have already provided.
Regarding your request of the default notice and termination notice we have requested these from the OC and will contact you again once we receive their response."

6th July 2017, 12:22
SAR sent to Barclaycard.

16th August 2017, 18:10
Today I received two parcels from Barclays.
1. Bundle of pages regarding my SAR request
2. Bundle of papers regarding somebody else's SAR request.

With regards to mine, I was expecting to be included, amongst othe things
A} A copy of the letter which they sent me in 2011 or 2012 to say they had bought Egg and had taken over that account (this is the account in default which 1st Credit now own).
B) A copy of the default notice which they sent in December 2014


I noticed in the SAR report that in May 2017 1st Credit sent an email asking for everything pertaining to the defaulted account and a couple of months ago 1st Credit sent a copy of a cca for a different barclaycard account which was opened in 2008 and settled and closed in 2014.
This doesn't help me very much at all.


18th August 2017, 17:12
Reply from Roger
"..your request of the default notice and termination notice we have requested these from the OC and will contact you again once we receive their response."

Well you know they asked in May and you know from the SRA
A} A copy of the letter which they sent me in 2011 or 2012 to say they had bought Egg and had taken over that account (this is the account in default which 1st Credit now own).
B) A copy of the default notice which they sent in December 2014

Neither of these were included ?. Its reasonable to assume that 1st Credit haven't got these documents.

The Default Notice is a key document!


20th August 2017

Reply from Di
Are you saying that 1st Credit hasn't complied with your CCA Request because they sent you a credit agreement that has nothing to do with the debt which they currently own?

I think that's very helpful

Whatever happens don't tell them they've got it wrong.

Is there any sign of the Egg credit agreement in that Barclaycard SAR? If not then 1st Credit won't be able to get it either.


30th August 2017, 15:50 - my reply
Hi Di,
I replied to your query in post #107, where I summarised the history.
I started this thread in post #86.
The Egg internet application is in the SAR. All it contains are my details, dated April 2005, the card type is EGG CARD.. There aren't any Egg t&c's in the SAR.

There are also 2 more barclaycard applications in the SAR.
1. Barclaycard visa from 2004 (which I had forgotten about) - last used about 2006 as far as I can make out from the SAR
2. Barclaycard Oyster in 2008.

The 2008 one is the application which 1st credit sent me, along with EGG t&c's from between 2004-2005..
Barclaycard must have mistakenly sent this 2008 form to 1st Credit, would they have also sent them the Egg t&c's (which weren't in the SAR)? or would 1st Credit have obtained these themselves?

21st Dec 2017 Financial statement received from 1st credit covering 1/12/2016 - 30/11/2017


30th April 2018, 23:41
Letter from Intrum informing me that 1st Credit became Intrum UK Ltd, and I don't need to contact them regarding my account.

23rd June 2018, 12:20
11/6/18 Letter from Intrum trying to get in touch again - if we do not hear from you in 10 days one of our reps to will be in contact about repayment..
They include the letter I received from Barclays assigning the debt to 1st Credit(Finance) Limited in 2015.

22/6/18 Another innocuous letter with a i&e form attached.

They are also trying to find me via mobile and email, which goes to spam.

4/7/18
Letter from Intrum saying the balance is still outstanding.
If I don't want to speak to them I can fill in the i&e form.

(Or I could just not speak to them).

26/7/18
Letter from Intrum
There is a discount available.
If you were to pay a partial settlement towards your account we will update your credit file entry to 'partially satisfied' and the balance updated to zero.
Wow - does that mean I can pick my own discount?

[Warwick65]

That letter is to tease you into contacting them. So obviously, as you have decided.. .Don't

Reading back from the SAR and what you expected, often they just include entries in the log to say letters sent and not actual copies. The DN details should be enough for them to recon an accurate copy.

Did you complain to the ico about them sending someone else's details?

[Roger]

That letter is to tease you into contacting them. So obviously, as you have decided.. .Don't

Reading back from the SAR and what you expected, often they just include entries in the log to say letters sent and not actual copies. The DN details should be enough for them to recon an accurate copy.

Did you complain to the ico about them sending someone else's details?

They have to evidence that a compliant DN has been issued (that's terms, amounts and timescales) plus any attachments pertinent and appropriate to that time and date. Again a reconstituted if submitted would require the OC certifying that copy plus prepared to be cross examined under oath. Otherwise any DCA or tom dick and harry could knock one up after the event!
If the OC has included someone else's details why complain to the ico? It will make pleasant reading in Court especially if reconstituted documents are submitted (please your honour whose are these the defendant or someone else's?)

[Westham1]

That letter is to tease you into contacting them. So obviously, as you have decided.. .Don't

Reading back from the SAR and what you expected, often they just include entries in the log to say letters sent and not actual copies. The DN details should be enough for them to recon an accurate copy.

Did you complain to the ico about them sending someone else's details?

Barclays first sent me the internet application in 2014. The account started out as an Egg card, and I don't believe Barclays have anything more than this.
They aren't going to recon an accurate copy.
How can 1st credit create a recon? They seem to think that it started out as a Barclaycard (see post#86).

As for complaining to the ico, it is easier not to bother - it wouldn't help my case complaining about Barclaycard now they have sold the account.

[Westham1]

They have to evidence that a compliant DN has been issued (that's terms, amounts and timescales) plus any attachments pertinent and appropriate to that time and date. Again a reconstituted if submitted would require the OC certifying that copy plus prepared to be cross examined under oath. Otherwise any DCA or tom dick and harry could knock one up after the event!
If the OC has included someone else's details why complain to the ico? It will make pleasant reading in Court especially if reconstituted documents are submitted (please your honour whose are these the defendant or someone else's?)

I don't see how Barclaycard could certify a reconstitute by 1st Credit here.
Also Roger, the other persons details haven't been included in my SAR. What happened was 2 SAR reports were posted to me, in separate packages. one was mine, the other was somebody else's with my name and address on the parcel..

[Roger]

I don't see how Barclaycard could certify a reconstitute by 1st Credit here.
Also Roger, the other persons details haven't been included in my SAR. What happened was 2 SAR reports were posted to me, in separate packages. one was mine, the other was somebody else's with my name and address on the parcel..

Exactly

[Warwick65]

The reason you should report Barclaycard sent you someone elses information is because it is wrong and they need to be held to account. Without complaints, they will continue to carry on. How would you feel if your neighbour received copies of all your financial dealings. Don't we have a duty to hold institutions to account or are we all 'I'm alright jack Daily Mail/Sun, readers'.


As for the DN - well you need to remember the proof in a county court is balance of probabilities and not beyond doubt. It is a nice thought to think they would need to certify a DN and be cross examined. Particularly in the small claims track that is unlikely. A statement from someone at barclaycard about what the log means might be enough. Also remember many judges don't particularly like consumers who are using the CCA to protect themselves.

A couple of quotes I have heard - one personally , about DN's from Judges
'Well I know one needs to be sent'
'Big companies like this do not make these types of mistakes'



Finally with using the the fact they sent the wrong SAR details to you - you can't just drop that in to court, documents, evidence and witness statements usually need exchanging two weeks prior to the hearing. County court really isn't like Rumpole.

I know I sound a little serious but i do believe in dotting the i's and crossing the t's.

Just as an aside, I am convinced, even though we won, without the best representation in court (via Joanna Connolly) I would have lost my small claims case. I have also read of many 'should have won' cases that have been lost, often, apparently because of the attitude of the Judge.

[Roger]

I have no intention of dealing point by point with what is obvious and in my own personal experience.
The AAD way is silence and minimum correspondence let the DCA'S time be taken up on the easy wins. Fight the Consumer Battle? At the start of the 21st Century there were some 150 Global Groups that run the Mercantile Economy. These Groups are interlocked. The Consumer Law is Mercantile Law. By all means if you wish be a Don Quixote reporting bad practices, In my case I concentrate on my Debts.

As for Jo I and my family are deeply grateful for the battle she fought and won against PRA (itself a Global Group). I cannot praise her or her staff enough and concur with your recommendation.

A entry in a log doesn't mean that a validly (in Law) worded, delivered document such as the DN has been properly and legally issued. The balance of probabilities requires evidence not hearsay. Reconstituted documents require proof that they are a true representation of a lost document. Today where scanning and digital documentation is common practice doubts must be cast over a institution who can produce a digitalised cheque and apparently doesn't retain digitalised copies of key legal documents. The balance of probabilities requires evidence from a person or persons who know at the time the document was allegedly issued. Not something confected by a DCA or their Lawyers.

The AAD way is Silence and responding only when appropriate.

Perhaps we can look at Warwick's Diary and benefit from his experiences.

[Warwick65]

Roger
As I said, I do not want to argue with you although discussion is welcomed

I do fully understand the AAD way but you need to realise there is no one size fits all solutions for managing debt.
When you started talking about mercantile law my initial reaction was FMOTL but I am sure you are not one of those poor misguided souls.

The problem is, an entry in a log may very well be seen by a judge as showing the action happened particularly if the claimant gets a WS from someone in the employ of the OC

As for my diary - well all I will say is that all but two or my debts have now run the full course and are statute barred . These were managed the AAD (+ a little extra) way although the AAD way has evolved considerably overtime.

As for not complaining - if it wasn't for the many complaints raised by myself and others who is to say the PDL industry would not be the same as they were, how much of the compensation wouldn't have been paid, how MMF may still operate in the unlawful way they used to - the list goes on. I believe in Social Justice and equality , therefore we have a duty as people to do what we can to stop the bourgeoisie or the ruling elite, abusing you and me (the proletariat).

[Roger]

Mercantile Law is off course the Law that governs Commerce also Money makes the world go round. The Law of Merchants that facilitates trade.

The AAD approach is minimum contact and yes coming to terms with your circumstances. logically not ever debt is UE.
The concentration of Globalisation of trading, money and produce is irrespective of so called political theories. Marxism, Communism, Socialism, Conservativism, Liberalism doesn't change the concentration of Global Commerce which is outside of the control of what we call nations. The interconnected nature of Globalisation has created monopolies which exist irrespective of the governance with the individual Nations.
But in our case and why this is pertinent to Debt and Original Creditors is these are now part of Global groups.
I am certainly not against fighting fire with fire but this is becoming ineffectual.
A log entry still doesn't prove a CC compliant document. If the original isn't available and a recon is produced then it has to be proven. The alternative is to permit recon's that potentially correct UE originals.

[Westham1]

Following the dissolution of Highbridge(see post #1) a Claims Management company took up the case against them and the lenders/debt collectors which has resulted in RBS buying back my debt from Cabot and writing it off, so that's a nice 8k+ I don't need to worry about. Should be a nice improvement on my credit score next month.

[Susie]

That is very good news, congratulations

[Westham1]

That is very good news, congratulations

Thanks Susie.

[Westham1]

Intrum continue to try to engage with me. They continue to send messages to my mobile, although they don't ring me. Not sure how the got this number.
They also keep sending emails, most of which go straight to my spam folder, thankyou BT.
I have received another letter from them today which says that "if you don't engage with us a search of your credit file may be undertaken".

I am comfortable with this debt as I have said before that they have no cca for this former Egg card which was sold to Barclaycard. They have only sent me a cca from a Barclaycard which was closed 4 years ago.

[Warwick65]

Its just threats , of course a debt related credit search - if legitimate does harm your credit but I have heard it argued that if no cca is sent as that makes the debt UE they shouldn't be doing such things. I was told it was based on case law which said irredeemably UE debts should not be on your credit file (Grace v Blackhorse I think).