liandconsmum's UE Diary

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

The edit button is back today - must have been some kind of glitch - but all okay now! Thank you!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

The edit button is back today - must have been some kind of glitch - but all okay now! Thank you!

LOL, it was a change that we done - however never noticed the omission cos we have it all the time (as admin).... sorreeee

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

LOL that's okay. I thought I'd done something to the settings on my computer - so that's a relief.

I've emailed you the CCA we received this morning from Virgin. My guess is UE, but god knows if that is correct. I sent it in two emails, as it was quite long, marked Part 1 of 2, and Part 2 of 2. Hope it all goes through okay! Thank you for all your help on this stuff!!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

I've emailed you the CCA we received this morning from Virgin. My guess is UE, but god knows if that is correct. I sent it in two emails, as it was quite long, marked Part 1 of 2, and Part 2 of 2. Hope it all goes through okay! Thank you for all your help on this stuff!!

Oooer, you've been stung with the old tick-in-the-box.... it is enforceable, sorry!

See page 4 - this clearly shows it was applied for online and has the corresponding tick. Regards to the tick-in-the-box - read this: ---> http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004 ... tents/made

Basically, for agreements made online after December 2004, the Consumer Credit (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 allows the signature in the signature box to be replaced by a tick box.

This account was taken with PPi - are you aware of that? Could be worth a reclaim....

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

oh poo... that's wretched... I will look into the PPI on it. I looked through it, and it looks like it was mis-sold -no mention of pre-existing medical conditions for starters, which DH has. I also noted that from pg10-14, those must be CURRENT T&C, as the printed address is our current address, and we were living at a different address when this account was started. Thanks. Will follow up with the PPI. Do I need to do a SAR on it, or just request refund in general?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Regards to the terms, it doesn't matter cos they can send a copy of the current ones - See my new thread and it will all make sense - sorreeeee

---> viewtopic.php?f=13&t=401&start=0

* Bear in mind it is worth checking that the agreement complies with s.18 - see here for details:

---> viewtopic.php?p=12111#p12111

As for what to do now, yep - send a SAR and work out all repayments. See this for full details:

---> viewtopic.php?f=42&t=53

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Hi Niddy - been busy catching up - I've sent off the complaint to the ICO re Tesco, and the letter to DCA re Halifax/Yahoo. I'm poring over the info for reclaiming PPI on the credit card now (Virgin) and hopefully will get that off in the next few days.

I do have a question regarding the Santander/Abbey loan and the s.18 stuff you linked to above. I'm specifically looking at this part...

So, a regulated, consumer credit agreement for fixed sum credit falls into three categories and the terms relating to all three must be in the agreement. For our example though, where s.18 may render an agreement invalid is where the loan itself has two 'parts' which fall into different categories; for instance (probably the most common example), a cash loan with PPI fall into different categories of credit:

Cash loan: --- 'unrestricted use credit' and 'debtor-creditor credit'
PPI: --------- 'restricted use credit' and 'debtor-creditor-supplier credit'

Both fall into the categories 'regulated agreement' and 'consumer credit agreement' and therefore, such an agreement would fall under the scope of s.18 and require that the two parts of the loan be regarded as seperate loans. This in turn requires that the prescribed terms for each part must both be listed on the agreement: Loan amount, regular repayments and APR for both seperately.

Therefore, if, as is quite common, the monthly repayment is lumped together without the repayment amount for the loan and PPI listed seperately, the agreement would not be properly executed nor would it be enforceable under s.65 as it wouldn't have the signature and all the prescribed terms on one document.

Perhaps I'm missing something but on looking at the paperwork they sent me for the CCA, I see nowhere where there is a separate monthly repayment amount listed for the actual cash loan and the PPI. The monthly amount is all lumped in together, although they show the total amount paid for each for the length of the loan. I will email a copy of that page to you, if you don't mind looking at it. If it's not worth following up on, please just ignore the email and let me know. LOL I don't know how you get your head around this as sometimes I just feel buried under paperwork.

Thank you so much - and hope I didn't add some confusion to this.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

I do have a question regarding the Santander/Abbey loan and the s.18 stuff you linked to above. Perhaps I'm missing something but on looking at the paperwork they sent me for the CCA, I see nowhere where there is a separate monthly repayment amount listed for the actual cash loan and the PPI. The monthly amount is all lumped in together, although they show the total amount paid for each for the length of the loan. I will email a copy of that page to you, if you don't mind looking at it. If it's not worth following up on, please just ignore the email and let me know. LOL I don't know how you get your head around this as sometimes I just feel buried under paperwork.

Thank you so much - and hope I didn't add some confusion to this.

Hiya

Ok in a nutshel s.18 means the two parts of the loan be regarded as seperate loans. This in turn requires that the prescribed terms for each part must both be listed on the agreement: Loan amount, regular repayments and APR for both seperately. On your agreement section 2 covers this correctly however section 3 (ppi) does not so yes, although you have a mini fight the fact that the apr and amount of interest is shown, along with repayments - the fact that the total is bundled together will NOT be enough to enforce unenforceability. I mean, feel free to blag it and see what happens - but if things went to court, i'd personally start to consider agreeing to repayments.....

Up to you at the end of the day......

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

ok, I see, thanks. I'm awaiting response on the PPI reclaim, so hopefully it's a nonissue.. just something I will take the time to look over on other accounts - wanted to make sure I understood it properly. All these little ins and outs are rather confusing. Thank you!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

ok, I see, thanks. I'm awaiting response on the PPI reclaim, so hopefully it's a nonissue.. just something I will take the time to look over on other accounts - wanted to make sure I understood it properly. All these little ins and outs are rather confusing. Thank you!

Haha - you're telling me that it's confusing? Hmmmmm ;Hmm ;Hmm

Just see what happens, we'll pretend it is UE and see how hard they push yea?

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Just a brief update: (mostly for my own purposes to keep up with it)

Tesco loan - complaint to ICO sent, awaiting response

Santander loan - request for refund of PPI, awaiting response

Virgin card - request for SAR, dual purpose for possible refund of charges and PPI, awaiting response

Halifax - letter requesting correct CCA info, awaiting response

Paypal Santander - making reduced payments, but planning on sending SAR request and requesting refund of charges and PPI (will type up over next few days and get sent out on Monday)

The rest are UE (additions, mbna) or advised £0 balance (santander card), so are being ignored and any letters read and filed.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Excellent - nice update, keep us informed of any changes..... y

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Received an interesting letter from DCA regarding Halifax card today. As follows:

I can confirm that after investigating the points that you have raised with our client it is clear there is a clear conflict of opinion here between your perception of the Consumer Credit Agreement rulings and the views expressed by our client. Whereas I would ask you to accept my assurance that we have been acting in good faith on the instructions of our client, it is clear that there is an impasse here with regard to the account. I believe therefore that the most sensible course of action would be for the company to return the account to our client and to cease any further activity with regard to it.
;Hmm

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Excellent. That's great lol, so the dca are wimping out, aaaw bless em?!!!

[liandconsmum]

Re: liandconsmum's UE Diary

Yes, I rather read between the lines and figured if they thought the company had a leg to stand on, they'd keep pushing me for money. The fact that they very quickly backed off when challenged makes me think they recognised that it was UE. Now I'll just wait.

So my ongoing status as follows:


Tesco loan - complaint to ICO sent, awaiting response

Santander loan - request for refund of PPI, awaiting response

Virgin card - request for SAR, dual purpose for possible refund of charges and PPI, awaiting response

Halifax - DCA no longer chasing account, sending back to credit company. UE at this point, unless correct CCA received from credit company.

Paypal Santander - making reduced payments, but planning on sending SAR request and requesting refund of charges and PPI (will type up over next few days and get sent out on Monday)

The rest are UE (additions, mbna) or advised £0 balance (santander card), so are being ignored and any letters read and filed.