cca, what now?

Honeybee_2

Received this letter today as 12(+2) + 30 is now up.

"We write further to your recent letter received in our office dated 14th august 2008, we have noted your comments.

Further to your recent request for a copy of your credit agreement, we unfortunately have been unable to obtain a copy to provide to you. We hope that this is not an inconvenience to you.

Please be aware that a recent High Court judgement held that once a credit agreement has been terminated the obligation to provide a copy agreement in accordance with the Consumer Credit act 1974 ceases to apply. There is therefore no penalty for our being unable to provide the copy credit agreement and, more particularly, the debt remains enforceable against you.

Please contact blah blah, etc..... to cough up the cash.

So, is this yet another bs tactic from the dca?

frazzmunch

sounds worrying...was hoping to do cca requests soon...can anyone confirm current position with this?

bargainbetty

Hang on, they are arguing that since the agreement was terminated that the rules don't apply in court?

How can they argue that a court will uphold the debt, when they can't prove there is one?

I would just resend the basic letter, stating that until proof of the agreement is received, there can be no acknowledgement. This time, don't send the pound though, just note that you have already paid for the information.

If they cannot provide it, do you think you could get your pound back too?

I'm not sure what it is I smell.... horse... cow... no. Definitely Bull.

fermi

bargainbetty wrote: »

I'm not sure what it is I smell.... horse... cow... no. Definitely Bull.

Yep. Definitely bull!

There was a case a while back involving some people called Rankine.

The Rankine judgement is widely regarded to be an extremely bad example of case law, made at a regional court, by a judge who was trying hard to rule against claimants who he felt were taking the p*ss. Furthermore it looks like it is not binding on any lower/other courts.

Debt collectors/creditors are recently quoting this flawed and non-binding ruling in an attempt to deceive you regarding their legal obligations.:mad:

The previous rulings by the High Court/Court of Appeal and the House of Lords are the ones that carry weight in these circumstances. They fully support the fact that the creditor needs to posses a genuine signed copy of the agreement in order to be able to enforce the debts through the courts.

Honeybee_2

I read something about the Rankine case earlier and from what I can ascertain, they were picking apart the cca they had....well at least they got something. :rotfl:

Thank you very much for your responses, I'll send the final letter tomorrow.