lookingforward's UE Diary

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

This is re MBNA loan/1st credit which is UE.
Today I have recd the following:-

Letter from Connaught as follows: They refer to my letter 17.2.11 (Threat by Lender/D.C.A - To commence litigation ) stating that I may consider the debt to be in dispute but they do not.

1st credit discharged all statutory obligations pursuant to your sect 77 CCA (1974) request prior to the a/c being referred to them. We shall produce evidence in court to support our assertion should legal proceedings prove necessary.

In the circumstances we would suggest you seek urgent legal advice on this issue as you appear to be misinformed as to what constitutes an unenforceable credit agreement.

You have to date been provided with a copy of your loan agreement, a copy of a/c statements and a statement of a/c and your debt therefore is due and payable.

We are not using “bullying tactics” to recover this o/s debt as you have suggested. We are seeking the repayment of an o/s debt which is due and payable, which you appear to be seeking to avoid paying on the basis of some non-existant technicality.

As stated above the agreement is enforceable and should you fail to provide us with a reasonable offer of repayment within 7 days, you may leave us with no other option than to seek to enforce it.


Over to you for advice please Niddy

Regards to connaught, and their claim that "they do not" consider the account in dispute; send this: ---> Enough is Enough Template

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

p.s. I did reply to your email asking for a copy of the agreement - ignore this, its fine. This post is dated after that request was sent (it was in my outbox for 3 days sorry!)....

[lookingforward]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

Thanks Niddy,

I'll get the 3 letters in the post today.

[lookingforward]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

Cahoot Flexible loan:

Story thus far:-


Last payment 26.04.10

24.5.10 CCA Request sent

04.06.2010 Delivered

10.06.2010 No response received. CCA Reminder sent

10.06.2010 CCA Rec’d email’d to Niddy to check

24.6.10 Letter rec’d saying looking into complaint

25.6.10 Re emailed Niddy for clarification on CCA

29.06.10 S10 Cease and Desist sent


17.7.10Letter rec’d acknowledging complaint stating they will investigate, bal still o/s etc etc.

28.7.10 transaction list for a/c received.

2.8.10 Letter rec’d apologising for delay.

2.8.10 Letter rec’d refuting S.10 need to send to Niddy.

13.8.10 Debtors final response CCA rec’d letter sent

26.8.10 Letter rec’d Moorcroft saying I have defaulted on agreement to pay £18.78 per month. So now in arrears by £18.70. Their records show dealing through a 3rd party if no longer the case contact them directly. Inless payments are maintained there’s a possibility they may recommend to their clients to instruct solicitots for legal proceedings.

4.9.10 Letter rec’d Moorcroft saying despite letters I have defaulted , arrears now £37.48. as a result of this a/c has been passed to home collections div for action. May involve home visit etc.

6.9.10 Threat of doorstep visit letter sent

5.11.10 Letter from Santander apologising for the delay still looking into the situation.

5.11.10 Letter from Santander replying to my letter dated 13.8.10. They refer me to their letter rec’d 2.8.10 (copy of letter & signed credit agreement again enclosed) and it is their belief that they have fully complied with all elements of the CCA and the agreement remains fully enforceable against me. They have no further comment to make in this matter as I have exhausted their internal complaints process. Enclosed a leaflet about the FOS in case I’m not happy.

6.1.11 Letter from Wescot chasing payment

12.1.11 a/c sold whilst in default of cca request to wescott

25.1.11 Letter from Wescott ack my letter which they are investigating and they will not be in contact whilst this is happening. They will contact again when investigation is concluded.

New letter from Wescot today enclosing a copy of the agreement which is the same as the one's prev sent to Niddy except for the fact that it's been printed onto Santander paper so has their logo on it this time. They state that payment is now required and give the different ways available to pay and state that in certain circumstances they can agree a monthly instalment plan.

Assume I ignore ?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

New letter from Wescot today enclosing a copy of the agreement which is the same as the one's prev sent to Niddy except for the fact that it's been printed onto Santander paper so has their logo on it this time. They state that payment is now required and give the different ways available to pay and state that in certain circumstances they can agree a monthly instalment plan.

Assume I ignore ?

Send this back to Wescot: ---> CCA Query - Missing Prescribed Terms

[lookingforward]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

Send this back to Wescot: ---> CCA Query - Missing Prescribed Terms

Will do Niddy, thank you

[lookingforward]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

BOS

Send this back to Moorcroft (brand new and up-to-date using current case law):---> Enough is Enough Template (when the DCA keeps threatening legal action but they've not complied with s.78)

Well done on this - result that even they confirm it!

Letter from Moorcroft rec’d dated 4.3.11 ack my recent correspondance (must be 28.2.11 letter) assuring me a/c is on hold while they investigate the matter further with their client.

Ignoring as my response as per Niddy above already sent re their letter dated the 3.3.11

[lookingforward]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

Today rec'd a letter from Barclaycard re Visa Card

Blue = sent
Red = Received

History thus far:

Last payment 27.04.10

24.5.10 CCA Request sent

4.6.10 CL Finance sent letter as the creditor in the matter. They do not hold a copy so are in process of retrieving. Confirm no enforcement action while request is o/s.

2.9.10 Statement 8.9.09 > 1.6.10 received from CL Finance

Todays letter headed re section 78 of the CCA 1974.
They go on to state what they must provide:- A copy of the executed agreement and a statement of a/c which is practicable to refer.
They then give the credit limit on the a/c £0.00 and the current balance £2900

Due to the current status the full o/s bal is now due, contact if experiencing financial difficulty etc

Please find enclosed a copy of your original executed agreement and a copy of the latest T&C's of the a/c prior to it being trans to the recoveries dept.

With ref to the civil procedure rules, we have provided you with sufficient info to allow you to understand our position. The CPR does not confer an automatic entitlement to documents before proceedings start. CPR 31.16 provides that a party may apply to the court for pre-action disclosure in certain limited circumstances, which do not apply here. The application must be supported by evidence-and the usual order is for the applicant to pay the costs of the application etc etc.

While there is no formal obligation on our part to provide documentation in answer to validation of debt correspondence, we have undertaken steps to provide you with the contractual terms under which your financial obligations arise and a statement of account.

They are fully satisfied that the sum o/s by me remains legally due and payable, you should continue to pay etc etc

This completes their obligation to me under section 78 of the CCA 1974.

Enclosed are 3 pages of conditions (no mention of me by name or address just basic conditions) and 2 other sheets which consist of:
My name and address to left hand corner and an enclosed box with your right to cancel blurb. Attached to this are 2 pages with conditions and right to cancel info, again no mention of me by name etc on the forms.

Ignore ?

Above was ignored and today rec'd from CL Finance Statement of a/c dated 4.3.11 showing b/fwd o/s balance

Also ignoring

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

Yep just ignore - keep us updated

[lookingforward]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

Regards to connaught, and their claim that "they do not" consider the account in dispute; send this: ---> Enough is Enough Template

I realise Niddy is on his well deserved holiday however I'm posting this one up so as to keep up to date as letters come in and also because they are threatening a CCJ


It's re an MBNA loan which Niddy has seen and commented as follows in Dec last year:-






This is a right mess, MBNA have cost themselves over £20k with this balls up ;;L

Ok, i'll put you out your misery - it is unenforceable nah

Why?

See here: ---> viewtopic.php?p=12111#p12111

This should be a multiple agreement with separate details and separate apr etc shown for the PPI (as it is in essence a separate loan) - as they have omitted all this, ooops!

Respond to 1st Crappy Credit with the following: ---> viewtopic.php?p=1503#p1503

Well done - result!









This is todays letter

14.3.11 Letter from Connaught ack my letter 9.3.11. they state that we confirm that you may consider this debt to be “formally disputed” we however do not. The credit agreement provided to you does conatin the prescribed terms, as defined by the CCA 1974

A loan agreement is a fixed sum credit agreement and accordingly the prescribed terms are:

Amount of credit – A term stating the amount of credit.
And
Repayments – A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following:-
Number of repayments
Amount of repayments
Frequency and timing of payments
Dates of repayments
The manner in which any of the above may be determined, or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

All of the above information is contained within section 1 of the loan agreement.

Your suggestion therefore that we are prevented from enforcing the o/s debt as a result of the credit agreement omitting the prescribed terms of a fixed sum credit agreement is quite simply wrong.

I can confirm if you fail to provide us with an offer of repayment within fourteen days, we shall have no other option than to seek to obtain a CCJ against you.

Their letter is dated 11.3.11

[lookingforward]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

I realise Niddy is on his well deserved holiday however I'm posting this one up so as to keep up to date as letters come in and also because they are threatening a CCJ


It's re an MBNA loan which Niddy has seen and commented as follows in Dec last year:-






This is a right mess, MBNA have cost themselves over £20k with this balls up ;;L

Ok, i'll put you out your misery - it is unenforceable nah

Why?

See here: ---> viewtopic.php?p=12111#p12111

This should be a multiple agreement with separate details and separate apr etc shown for the PPI (as it is in essence a separate loan) - as they have omitted all this, ooops!

Respond to 1st Crappy Credit with the following: ---> viewtopic.php?p=1503#p1503

Well done - result!









This is todays letter

14.3.11 Letter from Connaught ack my letter 9.3.11. they state that we confirm that you may consider this debt to be “formally disputed” we however do not. The credit agreement provided to you does conatin the prescribed terms, as defined by the CCA 1974

A loan agreement is a fixed sum credit agreement and accordingly the prescribed terms are:

Amount of credit – A term stating the amount of credit.
And
Repayments – A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following:-
Number of repayments
Amount of repayments
Frequency and timing of payments
Dates of repayments
The manner in which any of the above may be determined, or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

All of the above information is contained within section 1 of the loan agreement.

Your suggestion therefore that we are prevented from enforcing the o/s debt as a result of the credit agreement omitting the prescribed terms of a fixed sum credit agreement is quite simply wrong.

I can confirm if you fail to provide us with an offer of repayment within fourteen days, we shall have no other option than to seek to obtain a CCJ against you.

Their letter is dated 11.3.11

Not sure what to send in response to their latest letter as their due date to commence action is before Niddy's return and I don't want to have a CCJ to defend if I can help it, or whether to call their bluff and sit it out until Niddy returns ?

I've already sent the "Threat by lender to commence litigation letter" which Connaught batted away by saying they don't consider the a/c to be in dispute and following that I sent the "enough is enough" letter which has resulted in their latest response above.

Looking through the templates there is the "threat O gram-letter before action" letter but this seems to be if they haven't sent through the original agreement which they have and Niddy said was UE.

I feel bad because Niddy said to sit tight while he was away, but sods law that I should get a CCJ threat on the 1st Monday he's gone, and whereas I've had loads that use the word "may" this one seems more threatening.

Any advice would be appreciated.

[swanfan]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

I would send this--> Threat-o-Gram - Letter before Action

If they send court papers post again.

Bear in mind the word 'IF', it's probably just a threat try not to worry.

[Elsie52]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

Hiya

Yes, as Swanny says send the Threat o Gram - Letter before Action letter, its the correct one to send. Just keep them at bay until such times as they take it any further and then Niddy should be back.

Elsie

[lookingforward]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

Thanks Swanfan and Elsie much appreciated.

[lookingforward]

Re: fedupwiththeworry's UE Diary

Letter in the post today, thanks again