Pip's UE Diary

[mauijim]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Peculiar update re. Moorcroft/Halifax:

Jan Rather cryptically, have received a letter and £1 cheque from Moorcroft: "Further to your request for a copy of your credit agreement, we regret that because of the age of this account our client is unable to produce a copy of your document given that the agreement is over 6 years old and to this end we therefore return the £1 payment [...] Notwithstanding this our clients believe the above balance remains due and payable and we therefore require immediate payment of this sum or realistic proposals for repayment. The Information Commissioner's Office has confirmed that whereas a debtor is not obliged to repay the account due to the provisions of the CCA, this does not mean that there was no enforceable agreement. Look forward to hearing from you within next 14 days with proposals for discharging this liability."[/FONT]

So they admit they do not have the CCA which makes the account but they still expect full payment...yeah right!

[Pip]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

So they admit they do not have the CCA which makes the account but they still expect full payment...yeah right!

Hello Jim!
Well the odd thing is -- the original creditor sent what is an enforceable CCA last week! I'll sit tight and await some AAD advice re. what to do next if anything! DCA/OC @rses and elbows come to mind ...

[mauijim]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Hello Jim!
Well the odd thing is -- the original creditor sent what is an enforceable CCA last week! I'll sit tight and await some AAD advice re. what to do next if anything! DCA/OC @rses and elbows come to mind ...

Well that is strange and I would wonder where they miraculously found this supposed CCA? I am sure Niddy will have something to say on this.

MJ

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Peculiar update re. Moorcroft/Halifax:

Jan Rather cryptically, have received a letter and £1 cheque from Moorcroft: "Further to your request for a copy of your credit agreement, we regret that because of the age of this account our client is unable to produce a copy of your document given that the agreement is over 6 years old and to this end we therefore return the £1 payment [...] Notwithstanding this our clients believe the above balance remains due and payable and we therefore require immediate payment of this sum or realistic proposals for repayment. The Information Commissioner's Office has confirmed that whereas a debtor is not obliged to repay the account due to the provisions of the CCA, this does not mean that there was no enforceable agreement. Look forward to hearing from you within next 14 days with proposals for discharging this liability."

One might wonder why the ICO would be involved, as he surely has about as much relevance in this matter as would the Harrods store Santa Claus.

[CleverClogs (RIP)]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Well that is strange and I would wonder where they miraculously found this supposed CCA? I am sure Niddy will have something to say on this.

Perhaps it was skilfully manufactured?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Peculiar update re. Moorcroft/Halifax:

Jan Rather cryptically, have received a letter and £1 cheque from Moorcroft: "Further to your request for a copy of your credit agreement, we regret that because of the age of this account our client is unable to produce a copy of your document given that the agreement is over 6 years old and to this end we therefore return the £1 payment [...] Notwithstanding this our clients believe the above balance remains due and payable and we therefore require immediate payment of this sum or realistic proposals for repayment. The Information Commissioner's Office has confirmed that whereas a debtor is not obliged to repay the account due to the provisions of the CCA, this does not mean that there was no enforceable agreement. Look forward to hearing from you within next 14 days with proposals for discharging this liability."[/FONT]

WOW - what a fuck-up

Ok do not respond. This now changes EVERYTHING!!

Let us know if anyone contacts you regards this account, in meantime keep that letter oh so safe

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Perhaps it was skilfully manufactured?

Yep and the thing is, a recon based upon an original would suffice in court as per Carey. However that's still dependant upon them Having such original at hand in which to base the recon off of.

Anyway, it's a good result nevertheless

[Pip]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Yep and the thing is, a recon based upon an original would suffice in court as per Carey. However that's still dependant upon them Having such original at hand in which to base the recon off of.

Anyway, it's a good result nevertheless

Hmm. Interesting! The ironic thing about this is that the OC Halifax sent an out-and-out enforceable CCA last week! Moorshight don't seem to be aware of its existence though.

And I'm under strict instructions from Moorcroft that they are administering the account now (even though they haven't bought it) and I have to deal with them and not the OC!
OK, gladly in this case!

[garlok]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Unfortunately Pip, telling lies is the stock in trade of ALL DCAs. If it is not assigned in absolute and it isn't from the above, just make darned sure you have those letters safe.

regards
Garlok

[garlok]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

No FP I agree but they are all going to look pretty damn foolish if anything is subsequently tried. One or another is lying, both parties cannot be telling the truth. One could perhaps make out that the Halifax document is an out and out forgery, the last piece of correspondence (remember in the forces the last order given is the one that has to be obeyed etc) says there is now no agreement.

Moorcroft acting as agents of the OC have instructed the client in writing that is they and only they who are to be responded to.

regards
Garlok

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Moorcroft acting as agents of the OC have instructed the client in writing that is they and only they who are to be responded to.

exactly, thus my comment that it changes EVERYTHING!

If anyone hassles him for the debt now, the fact Pip has that letter means he can send a copy of it with one of these: ---> Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | CCA Query - Letter Previously Confirming No CCA

And basically hide behind s.127 till the cows come home (statute barred)

[Pip]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

exactly, thus my comment that it changes EVERYTHING!

If anyone hassles him for the debt now, the fact Pip has that letter means he can send a copy of it with one of these: ---> Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | CCA Query - Letter Previously Confirming No CCA

And basically hide behind s.127 till the cows come home (statute barred)

Yippee! And this had been the most worrisome one so far as the CCA received (or not? Could have got lost in the post) last week was enforceable! I might frame that Moorcroft letter, and the cheque with its pretty hologram...

I also got another CCA back today, from Capital One ... with my signature from years ago ... Signature doesn't automatically mean enforceable though

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

I also got another CCA back today, from Capital One ... with my signature from years ago ... Signature doesn't automatically mean enforceable though

It's unenforceable based on them not providing terms as at account inception, ie they have sent current terms and a copy of the agreement but not the original terms you signed up and allegedly agreed to....



I would respond as follows: ---> Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | CCA Query - Missing Prescribed Terms

[Pip]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Many thanks again, Niddy!

The page starting after the photocopy of the application form purports to be the "Original Agreement" -- there was a single sheet that I didn't bother scanning that just had on it:

Original Agreement

Name: Pip
Account number: 000000

That bunch of "Original Agreement" pages is a very nice clean freshly printed Word doc (or the like), and if they're so confident that's the wording of original agreement that was definitely present at the time of signing, then I wonder why they don't provide an actual copy of it ..?

[Pip]

Re: Pip's UE Diary

Pip's account no. 6
RBS Mint
Start date: March 2000
Balance as of Dec 2011: approx. £5,000
Last "full" payment (i.e. within their stipulated minimum): Sep 2010 (approx).
Last DMP payment via CCCS: Dec 2011
Default notice issued Nov 2010.
Status: Last payment in Dec 2011 (smaller amount in Dec 2011 than the regular DMP payment had been up to that month)

2012Jan CCA Request sent to RBS

It's over two weeks since I sent this and Royal Mail Track and Trace is just telling me that it was posted at such-and-such post office® and is being progressed through our network for delivery. Not yet heard anything from RBS -- I'll try phoning tomorrow see if the postal order has been cashed.

It does get on my , that ® they put now everywhere after "Post Office"!