What2donext / UE Diary

[PlanB]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

Seen a M&S store/creditcard with Sigma SPV which was at court get discontinued by the DCA today. Finally admitted it was a Mayhew. . . .

. . . Its had the DCA's all of a twitter for the last year.

Go on. I'm all ears

[PlanB]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

Seen a M&S store/creditcard with Sigma SPV which was at court get discontinued by the DCA today. Finally admitted it was a Mayhew.

^^^^ I've found it Have you been reading CAG

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...=1#post4195120

[what2donext]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

I'm guessing this was a M&S storecard which was "totally transformed" into a credit card in 2003 without any new agreement signed which is the real reason why it's UE?

Mine was sold to Arrow today too. Maybe the penny has finally dropped (Santander vs Mayhew) and M&S are offloading 2.5 million junk accounts
Let battle commence (again)

I knew I'd seen it somewhere

Thanks Plan B we had this conversation quite a while back just after you had won your case, we said at the time your judgement really gives us all a little more confidence in going the UE route, as you say let battle commence or let them surrender, also thanks to all other members who's comments are much appreciated

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

Always remember somewhere we were on and a peep asked how Plan B new what happened in that case, = answer:- I was stood next to solicitor. = Beautiful incontext!

[PlanB]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

Thanks Plan B we had this conversation quite a while back just after you had won your case, we said at the time your judgement really gives us all a little more confidence in going the UE route, as you say let battle commence or let them surrender

UE is all about confidence (and lack of CCAs obviously ) and I'm going to start my own "Two Years On Diary" shortly but here's a sneak preview of my stats:

£153k = total amount of debts owed

23 = number of accounts (credit cards & loans)

£71,358.07 = No CCA and/or creditor admits UE

£60,528.14 = (probably) UE based on rubbish/forged recons

£0.0p = amount paid to creditors since June 2010

3 = number of years to SB

365 = number of sleepless nights per year since 2009 but it's been worth it

So keep going

Plan B x

[ScabHunter]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

365 = number of sleepless nights per year since 2009 but it's been worth it

At least in 2012 you got one night's sleep, then

SH

[PlanB]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

At least in 2012 you got one night's sleep, then

Smart arse

Maybe there was another reason why I didn't get to sleep on the night of February 29th 2012

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

Smart arse

Maybe there was another reason why I didn't get to sleep on the night of February 29th 2012

How many will catch on to that one?

[what2donext]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

Barclaycard Credit Card (Mrs)
Dated Commenced - 14.6.99
Approx. Balance - £3138
Last Full Payment Paid - 19.5.11
DMP Payment Paid - 22.6.11 (no more payments being made)

07/07/11 CCA request sent
25/08/11 Letter received stating "We are concerned you are still behind with your payments etc also we may have no alternative but to instruct Mercers Debt Collection Ltd to send you a default notice etc"

26/08/11 Letter from Mercers stating - IMPORTANT - YOU SHOULD READ THIS VERY CAREFULLY Default Notice served under section 87(i) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974
We act as agents for Barclays PLC trading as Barclaycard
Despite a recent letter from Barclaycard you are still behind with your payments etc etc.
06/09/11 Received letter from Mercers see below
07/09/11 Account Sold whilst in Dispute letter sent via recorded delivery
14/09/11 Received letter from Barclaycard customer relations stating - "sorry you had to contact us regarding your Section 78 request. Thank you for taking time and trouble to do so. I am looking into your concerns and will let you have a response or update as quickly as I can but no later than 07 October 2011. In the meantime if you need to speak to me please call on the above number. I have enclosed a leaflet explaining how Barclaycard works to resolve complaints. I hope you find this helpful. Thankyou for bringing this to my attention".
01/10/11 Received another letter from Mercers - Fantastic Offer to help you . Make 2 of the missing payments & we will credit your account with the other 2 payments .

31/10/11 Received letter from Mercers stating you must contact us etcetc.
24/11/11 Received Default Notice from Mercers
01/12/11 Received letter from CALDER FINANCIAL headed A FINAL OFFER OF HELP - Your account with Barclaycard has been referred to us for collection for continued non payment of your account arrears.
However,Barclaycard have agreed we may offer you a repayment opportunity to avoid the need for further recovery action.
1-Our clients are prepared to accept 60% of your outstanding balance in full & final settlement
2-Our clients will allow us to offer you arrange of reduced payment options please call us etc etc.
05/01/12 Received letter - Formal Demand for payment As you have not complied with the recent Default Notice the outstanding balance is now due in full,Your balance will continue to acrue interest until we receive this payment .We will no longer send statements to you.It is our policy to let Credit Reference Agencies know etc etc.If a payment is not made by the 8th January 2012,a Debt Collector may call upon you or legal proceedings taken against you in the County Court.
06/01/12 CCA Reminder sent
13/02/12 Received a letter from Barclaycard - I am writing to inform you that the above account was assigned and transferred by Barclaycard to MKDP LLP on January 16th.Thia means that the effective owners of the above account are now MKDP LLP etc etc .
18/02/12 Received a letter from MK Rapid Recoveries- Further to our recent communication regarding transfer of ownership of your balance we have not received your offer of payment.We want to help you,Please call us,until we reach an agreement to clear this balance we will continue to contact you by telephone or letter etc etc.
21/08/12 Received a letter from MKRR: Further to our letter offering you help to clear this balance we have not received your offer of payment etc etc .
21/08/12 Account Sold Whilst in Dispute sent to MKRR
01/09/12 Received a letter from MKDP:We are in receipt of your recent correspondence, at this time we are unable to resolve your query, we will be liaising with the original creditor and will contact you within 8 weeks.
9/11/12 Received another letter from MKDP: At this time as we are still unable to resolve your query . We are however currently liasing with the Barclaycard , and we will contact you as soon as we receive a response etc etc.
22/02/13 Received from MKDP: Further to your recent communication, please find enclosed the documents you requested. Reconstituted Credit agreement and statements of account enclosed, please contact us etc etc
25/02/13 Missing prescribed terms letter sent to MKDP
06/03/13 Received a letter in reply to above letter: will upload
12/04/13 Received from KEYNES COLLECTIONS: NOTICE OF INTENDED LEGAL ACTION : It is with regret that owing to you not responding to our client's request for payment MK Rapid Recoveries have instructed us to collect the outstanding balance you have with them.
Unless full payment, or a suitable repayment plan is agreed, within 14 days from the date of this letter, legal action to recover the debt may be taken against you without any further notice.

Good morning everyone a quick update above on this account should we send Threat-O-Gram Letter Before Action to Keynes Collections, whom we suspect are the same company as MKRR as their address is the same thanks.

[MrsD]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

What did you receive in reply to your missing prescribed terms?

[what2donext]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

What did you receive in reply to your missing prescribed terms?

Thanks MrsD see http://forums.all-about-debt.co.uk/s...&postcount=663
We received that letter plus a load of statements and reconstituted agreement the same as we received on the 22/02/13 which when Niddy looked at it his reply was http://forums.all-about-debt.co.uk/s...&postcount=654

[MrsD]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

i would send the threatogram

or compose a reply to the LBA

as here

allaboutFORUMS - View Single Post - Slickfm UE Diary

there have been a few of these popping up

[ScabHunter]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

Good morning everyone a quick update above on this account should we send Threat-O-Gram Letter Before Action to Keynes Collections, whom we suspect are the same company as MKRR as their address is the same thanks.

Your suspicion is correct.

That letter is almost certainly a scare-o-gram, as it uses the word 'may'. If you look at MattyA's diary, he has received the same letter from the same rabble on the same day. This would suggest a mass mailing of threats, rather than a serious plan to take legal action. However, I would still treat it as a formal letter of claim and compose a bespoke reply.

I'll extend the same offer to you that I extended to MattyA – If you need any help composing the reply, I can do that, or I can look over something you have written.

SH

[ScabHunter]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

I have been thinking quite a lot about this one over the weekend, and trying to work out what I would do in this situation. Their letter of 6th March is actually quite “clever” in its own entirely deceptive way, as it confuses a true copy with an exact copy in an attempt to force the deceived alleged debtor to capitulate.

I've decided that what I would do is respond to the formal letter of claim in the usual way, but also point out at the same time that I have just submitted a formal complaint to their associate company, incorporating a CPUTR request for information. The reasoning behind this is that it takes the potential dispute out of the realms of relying on Section 78 alone, and into the level where the more significant legislation of Sections 61(1)(a) and 127(3) come into play. The combination of letters also reverses the polarity, in that it is now the debt collectors who need to worry about losing money. A court claim could result in them having to pay costs, while the formal complaint opens up the possibility of a Trading Standards prosecution and, more realistically, escalation to the Fobbing Off Service at their expense.

It is well worthwhile to read Priority One's CPUTR thread, if you haven't done so already. This is a tactic with a proven pedigree of keeping cases out of court, and now seems like the right time to bring it into play. I don't believe that so-called “LBA” is a serious threat anyway, but it might be possible to gain some significant ground by assuming that it is.

PriorityOne CPUTR 2008 (ex P1 CAG CPUTR 2008) - allaboutFORUMS

This is only my opinion, and what I would do in these circumstances. If anybody has any other ideas, post them here so that What2donext can decide which course to follow. Below are the letters which I would send, both at exactly the same time, but in different envelopes to the appropriate organisation. Send them recorded delivery.

SH

[ScabHunter]

Re: What2donext / UE Diary

Here is what I would send to KC in response to the threat -

"Dear Sirs

Re your letter dated [DATE]

Thank you for your letter, the contents of which I have noted. Since your letter clearly refers to the threat of litigation, I am treating it as a formal letter of claim, albeit an entirely defective one. I refer you to the Civil Procedure Rules Pre-Action Protocol Practice Direction, in particular Annex A and Annex B. You will note that your letter fails spectacularly to comply with either of the aforesaid Annexes.

I therefore place you on notice that any litigation on the back of this letter will result in an immediate application to the Court, requesting the matter stayed with costs against you on the indemnity basis. I refer you to Para 4.6 of the Practice Direction which explains the consequences of non compliance with the Pre-Action Protocol.

Turning to the subject matter of your letter, this matter is the subject of a dispute which has been raised with both yourselves and the previous owner of the alleged account, and therefore it would be appropriate, before you threaten litigation, for you to actively deal with the issues which I have raised.

SECTION 78 CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974

You will no doubt be aware that Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 allows an account holder to request a true copy of the agreement, upon payment of a £1 statutory fee. In this case, such a request was forwarded on 7th July 2011. This request was completely ignored by Barclaycard, who proceeded to bombard my letterbox with irrelevant and meaningless threats, despite the request being entirely in default and the alleged debt therefore unenforceable.

On receipt of my reminder letter of 6th January 2012, Barclaycard immediately decided to offload this situation to your own organisation. You were immediately informed of the ongoing dispute, which was in place at the time you became involved.

On 22nd February 2013, I was sent an allegedly reconstituted agreement, which blatantly fails to comply with the legislation. The judgment of HH Judge Waksman in the case of Carey vs. HSBC in 2009 makes it clear that a reconstitution must be a 'true copy' of the original, even though certain sections of the document can be omitted. You were informed of this non-compliance, and proceeded to respond in a facetious and misleading manner.

The sixth paragraph of your letter of 6th March 2013 is a pitiful attempt to evade reality, and to mislead the reader into thinking that the law states something completely different from what is actually stated. The second and third sentences of this paragraph have no relevance to each other, and are included purely to deceive. The second states “The term 'true copy' does not mean a carbon, photocopy, microfiche copy or other exact copy of the signed credit agreement”. This may be true, but it is entirely irrelevant. The third sentence states “This means that under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act, an exact copy of a Credit Agreement does not need to be sent to you in order for you to be liable for the above balance.”

The use of the word 'exact' in the third sentence belies your intention to deceive, as a 'true copy' as defined in the Waksman judgment, and an exact copy, are plainly not the same thing. The law may not require an exact copy, but it does require a true copy, and not the type of generic construction which you have provided that bears no resemblance whatsoever to the original.

SECTIONS 61(1)(a) AND 127(3) CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974

Notwithstanding the above consideration, it should be noted that Sections 61(1)(a) and 127(3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 are far more significant than Section 78 when it comes to enforcing an alleged agreement in court. Your letter of 6th March 2013 is also entirely deceptive in the way it suggests that the content included constitutes a 'final response', and in the suggestion that the Financial Ombudsman Service could become involved at that point. As you are perfectly aware, the provision of a 'final response' relates purely to formal complaints, and no such complaints had at that time been submitted. By the same token, only a formal complaint can be escalated to the Financial Ombudsman Service.

However, in view of the misleading nature of your communications, and your persistent refusal to address the issues I have raised, a formal complaint has now been forwarded to MKDP. This formal complaint incorporates a request for information pursuant to the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, in an attempt to finally get an answer as to the documentation which you actually hold. Note that any attempt to mislead in response to such a request can result in prosecution by the appropriate Trading Standards department.


In view of these considerations, and in accordance with the CPR Pre-Action Protocol Practice Direction, I look forward to your reply setting out correctly the nature of your intended claim and answering my dispute as stated above.

Yours Faithfully,"

SH