Cabot help

crazyhaggid

Ok just got a reply tonight from Cabot after sending them Fermi's letter: to summarise what they have said:

I told them that under Scots law they cannot pursue a debt if they fail to provide a copy of the terms and conditions, their reply “your credit agreement is regulated by the consumer credit act 1974, a term in the credit agreement states “this agreement is governed by the laws of England” – Surely this can’t be right otherwise all the different laws in Scotland would be irrelevant?

With regards to providing me with a legible copy of my terms and conditions they are basically saying that under the law the document does not need to state all the terms but simply point to them, surely this is wrong as I can’t even read the document to start with never mind see what its pointing at?

They also provided me with a second poor copy which apparently is Marbles terms and conditions.

I’m quite tempted to say go for it then take me to court as no court would entertain the copy of the terms and conditions they supplied but at the same time I’m worried they’d just win as the debt is mine. I am quite prepared to pay it off interest free as I had been doing until Marbles suddenly sold it with no warning.

I would really appreciate any advice on this matter as it’s got me really worried.

crazyhaggid

just one more thing you can spell my second name a couple of ways and on this second letter they spelled it wrong can I use this to my advantage?

crazyhaggid

anyone? I could really do with some help

fermi

crazyhaggid wrote: »

With regards to providing me with a legible copy of my terms and conditions they are basically saying that under the law the document does not need to state all the terms but simply point to them, surely this is wrong as I can’t even read the document to start with never mind see what its pointing at?

TWADDLE!

The agreement must contain all the prescribed terms. They cannot be stated in a separate document.

The legislation is clear.

There is also case law from the High Court of Appeal to support this.

Wilson & Anor v Hurstanger Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 299 (04 April 2007)

"all the terms MUST be within the signature document"

Paragraph 9.

It is not necessary or rewarding to go on a grand tour of the legislation in order to explain the issues we have to decide. Put shortly section 60 (1) of the Act gives power to the Secretary of State to make regulations as to the form and content of documents embodying regulated agreements. Section 61 (1) provides that a regulated agreement is not properly executed unless it is in a document containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to the regulations made under section 60 (1).

An improperly executed agreement is enforceable against the debtor only on an order of the court (section 65 (1)), but no such an order can be made unless it contains all the prescribed terms (section 127 (3)).

Paragraph 11.

Schedule 1 to the 1983 Regulations sets out the “information to be contained in documents embodying regulated consumer credit agreements”. Some of this information mirrors the terms prescribed by schedule 6, but some does not. Contrasting the provisions of the two schedules the Judge said:

“In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under section 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127 (3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement. More detailed requirements, which are designed to ensure that the debtor is made aware, so far as possible, of specified information (including information contained in the minimum terms) are to be found in Schedule 1.”

I agree. The discretionary power under section 65 (1) to order enforcement of an agreement which does not comply with schedule 1 may be exercised on terms discharging the debtor from having to pay any sum payable under the agreement (section 127 (2)).

crazyhaggid

Thanks again for help!

I just got off the phone to debtline, I've been told to write them one more letter stating that they have still failed to provide me with a true copy of my terms and conditions, if they still cannot produce one within 12 working days I've to take them to the ombudsman service.

I don't know what I'd do without this site and debtline! :beer: