liandconsmum's UE Diary

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Niddy - just a brief question re the MBNA account mentioned above. When the account was owned by MBNA, we did a CCA request (July 2010 - almost a year ago today) and got an application form one back with incomplete T&C. The DCA, however, purchased the debt, even though it was already in dispute over this. I'm curious - would we be within our rights to do another CCA request to the DCA that now owns the account to see what comes back? This DCA wasn't involved when we did our original CCA request - I'm sure they'll look at it as stalling, but I want to be sure of what they have (and don't have).

or is it just pointless?

[Paul.]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

theres nothing to stop you making a further request.

In fact it gives you more evidence incase you need to refer to this in any claim.

There is nothing to stop the account being sold, contrary to popular belief non compliance with a s78 request does not give rise to a dispute as to the underlying debt, so id be careful there when using the "dispute" word, the courts will not agree with you on that.

Also a s78 request can be put right at any time up to judgment,

See the Court of Appeal ruling in Kotecha vs Phoenix

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Paul - thanks. We'll send a CCA request as well as the above letter, and then determine where we go from there based on their CCA response. If nothing else, as you say, it provides more information.

[caspar]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

be careful there when using the "dispute" word, the courts will not agree with you on that.

Paul or anyone else who knows the answer - I am fully aware that non compliance with a s78 request does not constitute a dispute in the eyes of a court, it does, to my understanding mean they cannot continue enforcement action while they cannot comply.

I'm also aware that continuing enforcement action does not mean they can't stop asking asking you to pay your debt.

What exactly, in laymans terms, does constitute a dispute? Are we talking about a case where one side thinks the interest was x% and the other thinks it was y% so the APR is "disputed" and things like that, or is it something else?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Niddy - just a brief question re the MBNA account mentioned above. When the account was owned by MBNA, we did a CCA request (July 2010 - almost a year ago today) and got an application form one back with incomplete T&C. The DCA, however, purchased the debt, even though it was already in dispute over this. I'm curious - would we be within our rights to do another CCA request to the DCA that now owns the account to see what comes back? This DCA wasn't involved when we did our original CCA request - I'm sure they'll look at it as stalling, but I want to be sure of what they have (and don't have).

or is it just pointless?

You can do a new CCA at any point, so long as you pay the £1 statutory fee - usually you can do one per annum as per a SAR.

Yes, feel free to resend one but why bother, if the original is in default then you've agreed to repay a tenner a month they will just fob you off - think about it

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

What exactly, in laymans terms, does constitute a dispute? Are we talking about a case where one side thinks the interest was x% and the other thinks it was y% so the APR is "disputed" and things like that, or is it something else?

I class this as similar to my HSBC problem, basically I was a normal customer doing nothing wrong and then I got a letter closing all my accounts, within 28 days when they knew I was out the country thus allowing only 14 days. As such, my whole account is now in dispute because they have allowed a dispute based on it not being a one sided opinion.

In your example, that would not be a dispute, because you would have agreed to the terms and/or been told they were variable. A genuine dispute can be classed as when something has happened that was out of the terms of the agreement that has affected one side of the parties by the actions of the other.

So, lets say your bank suddenly say they want to claim back 50% of your card repayment each month, and give you enough notice, if their terms say they can do this they can - no recourse for a dispute. If however they suddenly added historic interest from inception as they'd charged it wrong for all those years, you could then dispute it as this would be a genuine dispute.

CCA disputes only mean "you" dispute the legality of the enforcement of the debt; you're not disputing the debt itself or its existence.

Well, that is my view anyway!

[caspar]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Useful thank you. It would appear that many creditors side with you on that, and quite a few stop enforcement altogether.

I don't know whether it's just me or are more creditors now becoming more aware of their rights under a S78 request and bringing the fight back a bit again?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

I don't know whether it's just me or are more creditors now becoming more aware of their rights under a S78 request and bringing the fight back a bit again?

I think most still quote Carey but really that needs appealing, well not appealing as such but needs someone to fight the principles behind it, I know paul says it is a good result as it provided clarity on a lot of points, that I agree, however the fact they can conjour up any old shyte and pass it off as being an original is a joke, even in the wildest sections of Borneo they don't have such prehistoric views that one person says this happened which is then passed in court - ermm, yep - ok!

Wanna see a prime example? The bank (HSBC) have conjoured up this shyte and say it is a copy of an original - Carey would suggest this would stand up ()..... ---> allaboutFORUMS - View Single Post - Keep-Trying UE Diary

See my point...?

[PlanB]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Wanna see a prime example? The bank (HSBC) have conjoured up this shyte and say it is a copy of an original - Carey would suggest this would stand up ()..... ---> allaboutFORUMS - View Single Post - Keep-Trying UE Diary

See my point...?

Oh dear. I've got one exactly the same piece of shyte from HSBC as the one in your example. Does this mean my shyte CCA is enforceable too?

[Paul.]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Bullshit

Utter Bullshit

Firstly thats a s78 reply, not a copy of the "original"

Secondly, we must not accept that the banks word is gospel, it is not

I had a case recently where that little note pad copy was disclosed, along with some terms and conditions,

Lets just say HSBC didnt win, and lets just say that on first glance the terms looked ok but when we looked they were HSBC terms when the clients agremeent was with midland bank

and lets also say they couldnt get the interest rates right

and lets just say you need to be like Columbo with these things, you will most likely find an error you just need to know what your looking for

[PlanB]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Bullshit

Utter Bullshit

Firstly thats a s78 reply, not a copy of the "original"

Secondly, we must not accept that the banks word is gospel, it is not

I had a case recently where that little note pad copy was disclosed, along with some terms and conditions,

Lets just say HSBC didnt win, and lets just say that on first glance the terms looked ok but when we looked they were HSBC terms when the clients agremeent was with midland bank

and lets also say they couldnt get the interest rates right

and lets just say you need to be like Columbo with these things, you will most likely find an error you just need to know what your looking for

I'm going to let you say all of those things! Mine was for a Midland account too - in fact exactly the same scenario as you have just described. Maybe this is why HSBC haven't (yet) chased me even though they've not had a dime from me for over a year. Are we allowed to know more about your recent case which HSBC did not win? It would really help.

My biggest question exactly how should Ts & Cs be linked? Some creditors have sent me photcopied application forms (or blank pieces of paper with my name on) and then 10-12 pages of Ts & Cs which they say "would have been on the reverse". They're kidding aren't they? A 12 page booklet enscribed on the back of a piece of A4. Yeah right. But seriously can a seperate booklet sent in the same envelope as the application form (or whatever) be considered "linked". Should there be a staple involved perhaps?

[Paul.]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

I'm going to let you say all of those things! Mine was for a Midland account too - in fact exactly the same scenario as you have just described. Maybe this is why HSBC haven't (yet) chased me even though they've not had a dime from me for over a year. Are we allowed to know more about your recent case which HSBC did not win? It would really help. NO sorry, but you dont need that info, what you need is the knowledge on where to find the faults!!!!

My biggest question exactly how should Ts & Cs be linked? Some creditors have sent me photcopied application forms (or blank pieces of paper with my name on) and then 10-12 pages of Ts & Cs which they say "would have been on the reverse". They're kidding aren't they? A 12 page booklet enscribed on the back of a piece of A4. Yeah right. But seriously can a seperate booklet sent in the same envelope as the application form (or whatever) be considered "linked". Should there be a staple involved perhaps?

There doesnt need to be a physical connection between the documents, it would be contained within for the purpose of S61(1)(a) if the terms were present in the envelope along with the application form

but people often pay too much attention to Carey and dont pay attention to their own cases, the devil is in the detail

[PlanB]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

There doesnt need to be a physical connection between the documents, it would be contained within for the purpose of S61(1)(a) if the terms were present in the envelope along with the application form

but people often pay too much attention to Carey and dont pay attention to their own cases, the devil is in the detail

Thank you. I suppose it's only one word against the other as to whether the booklet was genuinely in the same envelope. I hope this means that if the Ts & Cs are sent later then they're definitely not 'linked'. You fill in an application form and back comes a card with the Ts & Cs' booklet a week later. I have letters which say "here's your card and here's your Ts & Cs".

[Paul.]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Thank you. I suppose it's only one word against the other as to whether the booklet was genuinely in the same envelope. I hope this means that if the Ts & Cs are sent later then they're definitely not 'linked'. You fill in an application form and back comes a card with the Ts & Cs' booklet a week later. I have letters which say "here's your card and here's your Ts & Cs".

that would be a clear breach of s61(1)(a) in my opinion,

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Ok... so now that my thread is utterly hijacked....sigh

Can we return to my questions please?

Sorry, but I'm about 3 steps short of losing my mind over this and other things right now, and cannot wade through the legal arguments to see if they are answering me or having some legal argument...