MattyA UE Diary

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Update 25/09/2010

After being very quite to date received a letter today from Restons solicitors acting on behalf of HFC / My GM card account demanding full payment by October 8th.......but there may 'an opportunity to clear my account at a SPECIALLY discounted rate' - pity Im skint.

Not had one of these before so not sure what to do with it.

CCA'd em in july & reminded them at the end of August - no response to either....just the solicitors letter.

Do I send off the - Threat by Lender/D.C.A - To Commence Litigation template as it seems to fit the bill?

Also had another threat of doorstep visit from Albion - this time for BOS.
Will send the usual off to them.

Cheers !

Hiya

Yes, send that to Restons and also send the appropriate to HBOS/Albion......

[MattyA]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Update 25/09/2010

After being very quite to date received a letter today from Restons solicitors acting on behalf of HFC / My GM card account demanding full payment by October 8th.......but there may 'an opportunity to clear my account at a SPECIALLY discounted rate' - pity Im skint.

Not had one of these before so not sure what to do with it.

CCA'd em in july & reminded them at the end of August - no response to either....just the solicitors letter.

Do I send off the - Threat by Lender/D.C.A - To Commence Litigation template as it seems to fit the bill?

Also had another threat of doorstep visit from Albion - this time for BOS.
Will send the usual off to them.

Cheers !

Hiya

Yes, send that to Restons and also send the appropriate to HBOS/Albion......

Thanks Boss - will get em off tomorrow. 2

[MattyA]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Update 30-09-2010

Received a reply from Restons further to my leter re GM card saying that as my letter was unsigned,they consider it to be a draft from someone purporting to be me and that they will not acknowledge receipt or respond to unsigned documentation.
I will send off the 'Demand for Signature' letter.

Further demand from Albion (same person) re BOS - just a pay now in big red leters etc.
I will file this as I have already written to them - see previous post.


Also received a couple of doorstep threats from Mercers this time in respect of my barclaycard accounts.
I have sent them the doorstep special(altered slightly to suit this situation) as created previously by his lordship for another account of mine.

Hope evryone is doing ok & fighting on - dont let the B******s grind you down!

[MattyA]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Hmmm....
I have just re read the demand of signature letter and it does not really suit this situation as it was in connection with lenders refusing to release dtat without a signature.
Can I remove the data protection act points and just query why it is being questioned now after years of sending statements etc to my house without any other contact with me?

Any ideas? - can a solicitor refuse to acknowledge or respond to unsigned correspondence?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Hmmm....
I have just re read the demand of signature letter and it does not really suit this situation as it was in connection with lenders refusing to release dtat without a signature. Can I remove the data protection act points and just query why it is being questioned now after years of sending statements etc to my house without any other contact with me? Any ideas? - can a solicitor refuse to acknowledge or respond to unsigned correspondence?

Hiya, but it is relevant for the DPA so no you'd not wipe them!!

Try responding with this variation - it's better suited.

• Dear Sirs,
  
  Account No: XXXXXXXX
  
  Thank you for your letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, the contents of which have been noted.
  
  In your letter you make reference to requiring my signed authorisation prior to acknowledging me because, and I quote "you consider it to be a draft from someone purporting to be me and that you will not acknowledge receipt or respond to unsigned documentation" which I must tell you is utter garbage - please tell me in your wisdom why someone would purport to me, when the situation at hand is my arguing and disputing a debt? You really need to stop messing about with such ridiculous claims and respond, as appropriate.
  
  Now, to reiterate my previous point, the lender has failed to respond to my lawful s.78 request (CCA1974) to which I already replied explaining my rights, now with the addition that a signature is not necessary in order to provide me with the documents requested, being you already write to me at this address; coupled with the fact there is no provision that requires I send a signature anyway.
  
  As a result of the lender failing to acknowledge my lawful request, this account is now deemed unenforceable, in line with s.127(3) and s.65(1) (CCA1974), and will remain so until such time they respond to me, with the information originally requested. I therefore suggest you stop your silly threats and return this account back to the original creditor as required by you, upon your knowledge that this account is indeed disputed.
  
  Any attempt to pursue this account via a debt collection agency or the court system will be averred as unlawful and vexatious and will be defended at the highest level. Because you're stating that you need my signature, in essence to prove who I am; my first port of call will be to question your integrity because it appears you've been party to a lender that was sending sensitive data, including statements to this address for some time now. Obviously if you're that unsure of my identity now, I do have to question why a signature request was not made in the past? After all, did you not write to me in the first place, at this exact address? I certainly never contacted you did I? Seems you want the rules to suit your mood, but unfortunately I am more clued up than that and this nonsense should ceace immediately. Just do what I ask, and return this to the original creditor. Surely you can see where i'm going with this and also see that you're going to lose if you continue with this belligerence.
  
  For the final time, i'd like to draw your attention to the fact that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not require that i supply you a copy of my signature. If it is for Data Protection purposes then i can supply you with documentation to substantiate my identity to you. However, to date you & the original creditor have happily sent statements and correspondence containing extensive sensitive private information to the same address and so I have to ask, if you are so concerned that you are corresponding with the correct person why has it taken you so long to raise this? Please answer this point in your reply, i'd like to know why. As you are aware, disclosing data without adequate checks of identity is contrary to the 7th principal of Data Protection, listed in schedule 1 of the Data protection Act 1998. I note that there is no provision that removes the requirements of the act to provide this information on time, even if you are unsure of my identity. As such, I look forward to receiving the documentation requested, within the next 14 days, otherwise please stop corresponding with me, until you are certain I am the person responsible for the account in question.
  
  Finally, I refer you back to your legal obligations, in particular s.175 (CCA1974); which stipulates that "if it is your view that you are not the creditor, s.175 of the CCA1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor. In the case of an absolute assignment, you are a creditor as defined by s.189. If you contend that you purchased the rights but not the duties of any agreement, you are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties. Your attention is drawn to ss.5(2), 3(b), 6 and 7 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR)".
  
  
  
  Yours faithfully
  
  
  Sign digitally

[MattyA]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Hmmm....
I have just re read the demand of signature letter and it does not really suit this situation as it was in connection with lenders refusing to release dtat without a signature. Can I remove the data protection act points and just query why it is being questioned now after years of sending statements etc to my house without any other contact with me? Any ideas? - can a solicitor refuse to acknowledge or respond to unsigned correspondence?

Hiya, but it is relevant for the DPA so no you'd not wipe them!!

Try responding with this variation - it's better suited.

• Dear Sirs,
  
  Account No: XXXXXXXX
  
  Thank you for your letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, the contents of which have been noted.
  
  In your letter you make reference to requiring my signed authorisation prior to acknowledging me because, and I quote "you consider it to be a draft from someone purporting to be me and that you will not acknowledge receipt or respond to unsigned documentation" which I must tell you is utter garbage - please tell me in your wisdom why someone would purport to me, when the situation at hand is my arguing and disputing a debt? You really need to stop messing about with such ridiculous claims and respond, as appropriate.
  
  Now, to reiterate my previous point, the lender has failed to respond to my lawful s.78 request (CCA1974) to which I already replied explaining my rights, now with the addition that a signature is not necessary in order to provide me with the documents requested, being you already write to me at this address; coupled with the fact there is no provision that requires I send a signature anyway.
  
  As a result of the lender failing to acknowledge my lawful request, this account is now deemed unenforceable, in line with s.127(3) and s.65(1) (CCA1974), and will remain so until such time they respond to me, with the information originally requested. I therefore suggest you stop your silly threats and return this account back to the original creditor as required by you, upon your knowledge that this account is indeed disputed.
  
  Any attempt to pursue this account via a debt collection agency or the court system will be averred as unlawful and vexatious and will be defended at the highest level. Because you're stating that you need my signature, in essence to prove who I am; my first port of call will be to question your integrity because it appears you've been party to a lender that was sending sensitive data, including statements to this address for some time now. Obviously if you're that unsure of my identity now, I do have to question why a signature request was not made in the past? After all, did you not write to me in the first place, at this exact address? I certainly never contacted you did I? Seems you want the rules to suit your mood, but unfortunately I am more clued up than that and this nonsense should ceace immediately. Just do what I ask, and return this to the original creditor. Surely you can see where i'm going with this and also see that you're going to lose if you continue with this belligerence.
  
  For the final time, i'd like to draw your attention to the fact that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not require that i supply you a copy of my signature. If it is for Data Protection purposes then i can supply you with documentation to substantiate my identity to you. However, to date you & the original creditor have happily sent statements and correspondence containing extensive sensitive private information to the same address and so I have to ask, if you are so concerned that you are corresponding with the correct person why has it taken you so long to raise this? Please answer this point in your reply, i'd like to know why. As you are aware, disclosing data without adequate checks of identity is contrary to the 7th principal of Data Protection, listed in schedule 1 of the Data protection Act 1998. I note that there is no provision that removes the requirements of the act to provide this information on time, even if you are unsure of my identity. As such, I look forward to receiving the documentation requested, within the next 14 days, otherwise please stop corresponding with me, until you are certain I am the person responsible for the account in question.
  
  Finally, I refer you back to your legal obligations, in particular s.175 (CCA1974); which stipulates that "if it is your view that you are not the creditor, s.175 of the CCA1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor. In the case of an absolute assignment, you are a creditor as defined by s.189. If you contend that you purchased the rights but not the duties of any agreement, you are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties. Your attention is drawn to ss.5(2), 3(b), 6 and 7 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR)".
  
  
  
  Yours faithfully
  
  
  Sign digitally

Thanks Boss....good letter - its appreciated.
I will get it off to tomorrow.
Had a bad day today.In need of Beer - will post tomorrow.
Thanks again you are a god send.

[MattyA]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

No ...GREAT letter - cheers

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

No ...GREAT letter - cheers

Anytime matey - enjoy your beer y

[Phoenix]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Hi Matty,

Interesting that you are having the identical battle with Restons that I am!

Sent the second "signature refusal" letter a couple of weeks ago, but no reply as yet. Wonder if no news is good news?

Hope this isn't tempting fate - don't get my post until after 3 in the afternoon!

[MattyA]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Hi Matty,

Interesting that you are having the identical battle with Restons that I am!

Sent the second "signature refusal" letter a couple of weeks ago, but no reply as yet. Wonder if no news is good news?

Hope this isn't tempting fate - don't get my post until after 3 in the afternoon!

I will keep you posted as to their reply....are you dealing with a Miss H Messenger by any chance?
Hope the postman didnt bring you anything nasty!

[MattyA]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

update 1/10/2010
Bad day yesterday.
Another doorstep visit ,this time from power2contact( on behalf of Natwest) & again waking up my wife(again) who was in bed after working nights.
They ignored the doorstep visit threat letter(s) and came anway.
I have sent them the same letter that went to Resolvecall / Mint after their visit.

2 letters from PLR in house team for M&S again threatening doorstep visit.
Have sent them the harrassmnet/refuse to accept UE/doorstep visit letter.
I guess that this will be ignored also.
This account is enforceable according to Niddy so Im blagging it at the moment hoping for the best.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Sorry about that Matty, it's a pain when they call I know that but you can only send the letter telling them to stop - if they breach it the onus is on you to pursue formal action through the courts which you really don't wanna entertain - just stand firm and send the relevant letter off.

Regards M&S - keep blagging....

[MattyA]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Sorry about that Matty, it's a pain when they call I know that but you can only send the letter telling them to stop - if they breach it the onus is on you to pursue formal action through the courts which you really don't wanna entertain - just stand firm and send the relevant letter off.

Regards M&S - keep blagging....

Thanks for the response your nidship - much appreciated as ever.

I have had a letter from HSBC requesting I verify my signature ( I have SAR requested em)- I have previously sent the signature refusal letter but they say that they must verify my signature before releasing the data.
Should I amend the Restons letter above & give that a go or... was also thinking that I could tell them that I could pick up from the branch & verify who I am with my passport?

What do you reckon?

Regards,

MattyA

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

I have had a letter from HSBC requesting I verify my signature ( I have SAR requested em)- I have previously sent the signature refusal letter but they say that they must verify my signature before releasing the data.
Should I amend the Restons letter above & give that a go or... was also thinking that I could tell them that I could pick up from the branch & verify who I am with my passport?

What do you reckon?

Regards,

MattyA

NO! Do not give in - what you do now is formally complain to the ICO about this ---> http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/data_protection.aspx

You be citing failure to respond correctly to a s.7 request when the lender has been previously satisfied you are who you say you are by sending sensitive data to you in the past etc.....

Simply write to HSBC and say "I've formally complained to the ICO, copy attached" and attach a brief copy of what you've complained about.

Basically use the following as your argument to both the ICO and HSBC:

Because you're stating that you need my signature, in essence to prove who I am; my first port of call will be to question your integrity because it appears you've been sending sensitive data, including statements to this address for some time now. Obviously if you're that unsure of my identity now, I do have to question why a signature request was not made before you sent me each statement, or prior to each other correspondence sent? Surely you can see where i'm going with this and also see that you're going to lose if you continue with this belligerence.

For the final time, i'd like to draw your attention to the fact that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not require that i supply you a copy of my signature. If it is for Data Protection purposes then i can supply you with documentation to substantiate my identity to you. However, to date you have happily sent statements and correspondence containing extensive sensitive private information to the same address and so I have to ask, if you are so concerned that you are corresponding with the correct person why has it taken you so long to raise this? Please answer this point in your reply, i'd like to know why.

As you are aware, disclosing data without adequate checks of identity is contrary to the 7th principal of Data Protection, listed in schedule 1 of the Data protection Act 1998. I note that there is no provision that removes the requirements of the act to provide this information on time, even if you are unsure of my identity.

[Phoenix]

Re: MattyA UE Diary

Hi Matty,

Interesting that you are having the identical battle with Restons that I am!

Sent the second "signature refusal" letter a couple of weeks ago, but no reply as yet. Wonder if no news is good news?

Hope this isn't tempting fate - don't get my post until after 3 in the afternoon!

I will keep you posted as to their reply....are you dealing with a Miss H Messenger by any chance?
Hope the postman didnt bring you anything nasty!

Just seen this Matty, so sorry for the delay in replying!

Have had two letters - one from Mr. M McDonald and the other from Miss L Tipping.

So, they must have quite a lot of staff - unless they make the names up!