Tweet
Re: Stuff the banks ue diary
I have taken out the bits that didn't apply to my account....and adapted to suit my position....
If its pants, can you let me know before i send it....
e
write with reference to the above numbered account.
The recent McGuffick and Carey cases confirmed that a lender should submit upon request a valid true copy of the original CCA. In MBNA v McCullagh; the Judge ruled;
"The terms and conditions are plainly not a copy of those on the original agreement. There may only be one difference identified (it is difficult to tell from the illegible copy of the original) but that is enough. The obligation is to provide "a copy of the executed agreement". This plainly cannot be a copy of the original agreement. It is not open to the claimant to say that the difference is 'de minimis'. They have to provide a copy of the original (reconstituted or otherwise)"
There are also several other recent cases that alleviate the Carey Judgment such as Hayes v HFC, at Blackpool county court in July 2010. She successfully overturned a charging order on her home. Judge Bell agreed that the reconstituted agreement was not accurate. Then you have the case of Kotecha v Phoenix in which Phoenix attempted to recover a debt owed on a HFC bank credit card. The appeal judges agreed the bank had not been able to supply an accurate copy of the original agreement. In Murphy v Cabot the recorder, Nigel Clayton, found the copy of the agreement was illegible. Similarly, in Paterson v Cabot Judge Russell decided the copy of that agreement was illegible, the terms and conditions were not the ones originally supplied. In both the Cabot cases they lost as they had clearly failed to produce a properly reconstituted document.
I therefore suggest you go away and stop harassing me with such nonsense. If you really want to waste my time, the courts time and your clients time by pursuing this "lost cause" then please feel free - however this will be emphasised when I apply for set-aside, moreso because I am telling you the law and telling you that whilst an account is in dispute no formal action can and should be taken.
I shall be citing the following reasons; to get any formal request made by you, or your solicitors, set-aside:
. Similarly, in line with the most recent OFT Guidance surrounding unenforceability (October 2010), you should be aware that the OFT has stipulated the following;
Sections 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 outline the information creditors must provide to debtors under fixed-term, running account & Hire Agreements. Under these sections a debtor can pay £1 to get:
• a copy of their agreement
• copies of some of the other documents mentioned in their agreement
• a statement of account
• The document sent to me by the original creditor ‘ Argos’ is merely an application form.
• The original creditor ‘Argos’ has also failed to supply me with a SAR which i applied for on 5th December 2011.
•
I have made myself crystal clear, now I suggest you go and pass this account back to the Original Creditor and stop with the bullying tactics, they will not work; also stop wasting my time. If you decide to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate formal complaints with the appropriate authorities including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action.
I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished. I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter and look forward to hearing from you in due course.
Yours faithfully,
Sign Digitally
I have taken out the bits that didn't apply to my account....and adapted to suit my position....
If its pants, can you let me know before i send it....
e
write with reference to the above numbered account.
The recent McGuffick and Carey cases confirmed that a lender should submit upon request a valid true copy of the original CCA. In MBNA v McCullagh; the Judge ruled;
"The terms and conditions are plainly not a copy of those on the original agreement. There may only be one difference identified (it is difficult to tell from the illegible copy of the original) but that is enough. The obligation is to provide "a copy of the executed agreement". This plainly cannot be a copy of the original agreement. It is not open to the claimant to say that the difference is 'de minimis'. They have to provide a copy of the original (reconstituted or otherwise)"
There are also several other recent cases that alleviate the Carey Judgment such as Hayes v HFC, at Blackpool county court in July 2010. She successfully overturned a charging order on her home. Judge Bell agreed that the reconstituted agreement was not accurate. Then you have the case of Kotecha v Phoenix in which Phoenix attempted to recover a debt owed on a HFC bank credit card. The appeal judges agreed the bank had not been able to supply an accurate copy of the original agreement. In Murphy v Cabot the recorder, Nigel Clayton, found the copy of the agreement was illegible. Similarly, in Paterson v Cabot Judge Russell decided the copy of that agreement was illegible, the terms and conditions were not the ones originally supplied. In both the Cabot cases they lost as they had clearly failed to produce a properly reconstituted document.
I therefore suggest you go away and stop harassing me with such nonsense. If you really want to waste my time, the courts time and your clients time by pursuing this "lost cause" then please feel free - however this will be emphasised when I apply for set-aside, moreso because I am telling you the law and telling you that whilst an account is in dispute no formal action can and should be taken.
I shall be citing the following reasons; to get any formal request made by you, or your solicitors, set-aside:
. Similarly, in line with the most recent OFT Guidance surrounding unenforceability (October 2010), you should be aware that the OFT has stipulated the following;
Sections 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 outline the information creditors must provide to debtors under fixed-term, running account & Hire Agreements. Under these sections a debtor can pay £1 to get:
• a copy of their agreement
• copies of some of the other documents mentioned in their agreement
• a statement of account
• The document sent to me by the original creditor ‘ Argos’ is merely an application form.
• The original creditor ‘Argos’ has also failed to supply me with a SAR which i applied for on 5th December 2011.
•
I have made myself crystal clear, now I suggest you go and pass this account back to the Original Creditor and stop with the bullying tactics, they will not work; also stop wasting my time. If you decide to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate formal complaints with the appropriate authorities including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action.
I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished. I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter and look forward to hearing from you in due course.
Yours faithfully,
Sign Digitally
NatWest/RBS Mint - (Un)Helpful banking 
Comment