GDPR Cookie Consent by SimpleServe Privacy Script Greymatter's ue Diary - AAD Consumer Forum

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greymatter's ue Diary

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

    Thanks PlanB

    Originally posted by PlanB View Post
    If NatWest bank hasn't produced a CCA or even a recon of an agreement, what evidence are they relying on when they claim the account was opened in 1980
    It does come across as a bit devious I must say.I hope that Paul can pull the rabbit out of the bag here.
    1st Access then to Mastercard ,obvious upgrade,card expires every 5 years,are these changes pushing me into the so called May 19th 1985 bracket.
    Strange that they must of replaced my expired card 5 years from April 1980=April 1985,but the exact day dates are missing.It could push the replacement into 19th May 1985.
    GM

    Comment


    • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

      Originally posted by PlanB View Post
      If NatWest bank hasn't produced a CCA or even a recon of an agreement, what evidence are they relying on when they claim the account was opened in 1980
      Terms - as mentioned above, terms is all they need produce.... No need for a recon.
      I'm the forum administrator and I look after the theme & features, our volunteers & users and also look after any complaints or Data Protection queries that pass through the forum or main website. I am extremely busy so if you do contact me or need a reply to a forum post then use the email or PM features offered because I do miss things and get tied up for days at a time!

      If you spot any spammers, AE's, abusive or libellous posts or anything else that just doesn't feel right then please report them to me as soon as you spot them at: webmaster@all-about-debt.co.uk

      Comment


      • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

        Originally posted by greymatter View Post
        Thanks PlanB


        I hope that Paul can pull the rabbit out of the bag here.
        Unlikely, it is you that needs to give me the rabbit so to speak before i can pull it out of a bag.

        The devil is always in the detail and the best case i can refer you to on evidence is HFO v Wegmuller as that showed what evidence you need to really challenge the enforceability of the agreement.

        Comment


        • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

          Hi Niddy, all I have is statements from April 2003 to date and the original DN dated Jul 2003 and TN dated Aug 2003 and various letters from 2004 regarding reduced payments etc.There is one however ,stating that they will accept a Payment reduction and that' this concession does not alter the terms and conditions of your card agreement'.
          Would you like a copy?
          Thanks
          GM

          Comment


          • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

            Originally posted by greymatter View Post
            Thanks PlanB

            1st Access then to Mastercard ,obvious upgrade,card expires every 5 years,are these changes pushing me into the so called May 19th 1985 bracket.
            Strange that they must of replaced my expired card 5 years from April 1980=April 1985,but the exact day dates are missing.It could push the replacement into 19th May 1985.
            GM
            Dare I say 'the devil is in the detail' . . .

            I had an Access card with NatWest during the last recession in 1990/91. I have an astonishing memory for facts and I recall my card blocked by the bank leaving me stranded in Hampshire without petrol unable to get to work in London. I keep paperwork so I'll see what's in my file in case it helps. I now have a NatWest Visa with the same bank account and I have a new application form signed for it in 2001.

            Time for some research

            Comment


            • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

              Thanks PlanB
              GM

              Comment


              • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

                Hi Paul
                Originally posted by Paul. View Post
                Unlikely, it is you that needs to give me the rabbit so to speak before i can pull it out of a bag.

                The devil is always in the detail and the best case i can refer you to on evidence is HFO v Wegmuller as that showed what evidence you need to really challenge the enforceability of the agreement.
                Please would you point me to the case HFO v Wegmuller .
                Thanks
                GM

                Comment


                • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

                  Originally posted by Never-In-Doubt View Post
                  Terms - as mentioned above, terms is all they need produce.... No need for a recon.
                  I know that's true if the account was opened before 1985. But how do they know it was opened in 1980 when they've not even given any specific month or date to back up their claim I know Paul's right that the onus is on GM to provide the evidence of when it was opened. Can he have access to his account history through a SAR or won't it go back that far? It seems awfully unfair that a bank can just pick a year out of thin air and not have to prove it

                  Comment


                  • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

                    Originally posted by greymatter View Post
                    Hi Paul


                    Please would you point me to the case HFO v Wegmuller .
                    Thanks
                    GM
                    http://forums.all-about-debt.co.uk/s...25&postcount=1
                    I'm an official AAD Moderator and also a volunteer, here to help make the forum run smoothly. Any views or opinions are mine and not the official line of AAD. Similarly, any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability. If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional - Find a Solicitor or go to the National Probono Centre.

                    If you spot an abusive or libellous post then please report it by Clicking Here. If you need to contact me, for instance if I've issued you a warning, moved, edited or deleted your post, please send me a message by clicking my username.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

                      Originally posted by greymatter View Post
                      Hi Paul


                      Please would you point me to the case HFO v Wegmuller .
                      Thanks
                      GM
                      You'll need to wait until the Link Fairy is back on duty. She must have gone for her dinner break

                      EDIT: In2Deep beat me to it - he's the Link Fairy's understudy
                      Last edited by PlanB; 23 May 2012, 19:42.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

                        Originally posted by PlanB View Post
                        You'll need to wait until the Link Fairy is back on duty. She must have gone for her dinner break
                        He's not a fairy done ^^^^
                        I'm an official AAD Moderator and also a volunteer, here to help make the forum run smoothly. Any views or opinions are mine and not the official line of AAD. Similarly, any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability. If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional - Find a Solicitor or go to the National Probono Centre.

                        If you spot an abusive or libellous post then please report it by Clicking Here. If you need to contact me, for instance if I've issued you a warning, moved, edited or deleted your post, please send me a message by clicking my username.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

                          Originally posted by in 2 deep View Post
                          He's not a fairy
                          So I hear

                          Comment


                          • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

                            Hi PlanB
                            Originally posted by PlanB View Post
                            I know that's true if the account was opened before 1985. But how do they know it was opened in 1980 when they've not even given any specific month or date to back up their claim I know Paul's right that the onus is on GM to provide the evidence of when it was opened. Can he have access to his account history through a SAR or won't it go back that far? It seems awfully unfair that a bank can just pick a year out of thin air and not have to prove it
                            They have cobbled a letter together stating that the account was opened in April 1980.This is correct.I have not kept records that far back ,however this leter contains fairly recent tel numbers(see previous post #147)which is strange.
                            GM
                            Last edited by greymatter; 23 May 2012, 19:47.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

                              Originally posted by greymatter View Post
                              Hi PlanB


                              They have cobbled a letter together stating that the account was opened in April 1980.This is correct.I have not kept records that far back ,however this leter contains fairly recent tel numbers(see previous post #147)which is strange.
                              GM
                              Oh dear. If you agree that this was correct then how can you go into a witness box in court and swear on a Bible that NatWest have got the date/year wrong

                              I think you're being told that the bank don't need to comply with s.78 but they will have other legal hoops to jump through in order to enforce this debt so those need to be investigated too. My Santander case had four legal arguments and we won on three of them. Ironically the only one we didn't win was non-compliance with s.78 (we should have won that one too ) but we still got the claim dismissed and won the case

                              Comment


                              • Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

                                Hi PlanB
                                Originally posted by PlanB View Post
                                Oh dear. If you agree that this was correct then how can you go into a witness box in court and swear on a Bible that NatWest have got the date/year wrong

                                I think you're being told that the bank don't need to comply with s.78 but they will have other legal hoops to jump through in order to enforce this debt so those need to be investigated too. My Santander case had four legal arguments and we won on three of them. Ironically the only one we didn't win was non-compliance with s.78 (we should have won that one too ) but we still got the claim dismissed and won the case
                                Ok so the date is correct,what I find ridiculous is that CCA 1974 sec 61
                                '(1) A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless-
                                (a) a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to regulations under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed manner by both the Debtor or hirer and by or on behalf of the creditor or owner,'
                                and I thoght sec 127 would kick in.
                                So why is this taken in cases and quoted yet my 'not supplied' agreement dated 1980 is blown away.WTF.
                                GM

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X