Littlewoods Credit Agreement

thaylock

I wrote a letter to Littlewoods on behalf of someone asking for a SIGNED credit agreement from Littlewoods. Littlewoods took 4 weeks to respond & eventually sent a copy of the agreement - BUT NOT SIGNED. In their reply they stated the following:

Under sections 77 and 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 we are required to provide a copy of the executed agreement (if any). On the ASSUMPTION that you have signed and returned to us the agreement supplied to you are the time of opening your account, we enclose a copy of that agreement which complies with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983.

Now, I quite clearly stated in the letter I sent to them I need to see a copy of the SIGNED agreement because without it Littlewoods may not be able to get their money back unless they go through the courts (where they probably won't have a leg to stand on without a signed agreement).

Questions: Has anyone else received a response like this, if so how did you pursue the matter ? Surely without a signed agreement Littlewoods can kiss their money goodbye. Are Littlewoods just stalling for time ? What action should I take ?

Sounds to me like they don't have a signed agreement because in their letter they have stated 'on the ASSUMPTION', which is a pretty stupid thing to say, I want the signed agreement.

Thanks

Harassed_2

They're trying it on. Respond with this letter, should sort them out.

I am in receipt of your letter dated (date); the contents are noted. The item and confirmation that I requested from you has not been supplied.

1. I requested a true copy of the consumer credit agreement that you state exists; to which I am entitled to under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA). The supposed copy that you have supplied is not a true copy; there are major errors in the information contained therein. I would draw your attention to the following. It is an offence under Section 40(1)(c)/(d) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 to falsely present a document as having some official character which it has not, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed as a debt due under a contract. It is also contrary to the provisions of the Section 25(2)(d) of the CCA to mislead the debtor as to the origin or authority of any document.

2. I also requested you to confirm whether or not you entered a properly executed and signed consumer credit agreement for the above account. This you have not done. As you are aware, a credit agreement that is not properly documented and signed by the customer is totally unenforceable under the CCA and therefore is a complete defence to any court claim that is issued. Take note at this stage, that any legal action you may contemplate will be both vigorously defended and contested.

As the information which was requested has not been supplied, take this letter as notice that both the account and the amount you claim is owed, are in dispute. They will remain so until the requested information has been supplied.

I await your response in writing,

leela_2

If you read my previous posts you will see that is is what happened to me,they sent me the same thing.Send them the letter that Harassed has posted and maybe give them a call as well ,that is what i did.Good Luck!

thaylock

Excellent, I will phone them & send the letter as supplied by Harassed.

Harassed_2

I wouldn't bother to phone, just send the letter by Recorded Delivery.

thaylock

Will do, thanks !!

GameOver_2

Harassed - you are very intelligent, i am impressed with that!

Harassed_2

Harassed - you are very intelligent, i am impressed with that!

Curious post, but thank you.

GameOver_2

Sorry it was just a compliment because you knew exactly what you were talking about with regards to the agreement.

CTT_2

Cant help feeing someone is trying to get obtain goods without paying for them. Otherwise why may such a deal about a signed agreement.

Harassed_2

why may such a deal about a signed agreement.

Because catalogue companies are notorious for going to court and are quite happy to use the law against those in difficulties. They do this in the full knowledge that if their bluff was called in court, they couldn't enforce. The law is a two-way street, these companies should start doing things in the correct way.

Because they're greedy and too scared they might miss an impulse 'buy' they rush out the goods without an enforceable agreement in place.