Sutton's default removal letters

pinkerton_angel

You're the best, thanks :T

nov70

Recently applied to shop direct for a copy of my CA today received a letter saying as they could not find a copy of the agreement they would no longer chase me for the out standing balance however they have point blank refused to remove the default notice from my credit file saying it is there legal right to leave it there how can they refuse to remove it when they cant prove i owe the debt, anyone any template letters i can send to push them to remove it?

never-in-doubt

nov70 wrote: »

Recently applied to shop direct for a copy of my CA today received a letter saying as they could not find a copy of the agreement they would no longer chase me for the out standing balance however they have point blank refused to remove the default notice from my credit file saying it is there legal right to leave it there how can they refuse to remove it when they cant prove i owe the debt, anyone any template letters i can send to push them to remove it?

It is something that is really contentious in that we all argue this but just because they cannot pursue the debt (unenforceable due to no CCA) doesn't mean they cannot add a default. Hold fire a few days cos we're waiting on a reply from littlewoods for someone else so we'll test the water - dont want to do a similar letter for you only for them to click that someone else is doing the work otherwise they will play silly beggars.

Just bear with us....... :beer:

To answer you though, they can add a default but we can get them another way cos old littlewoods accounts didn't mention something quite important - they forgot to mention that they would share data with CRA's so in the meantime, try and remember the exact date you got the account and the exact type of account (i.e. littlewoods, LX direct, LX card etc etc) and then i'll get the terms and check them for you....

Same goes to pinkerton_angel

gezza2k

hi guys, im in a similar situation with littlewoods.
They are unable to provide cca & will not pursue but wont remove the default.

The account was opened on 19/04/2003 and defaulted on 25/09/2006

If your method works n-i-d can i plzzzz have a letter to send to these muppets
Cheers
Gez

never-in-doubt

gezza2k wrote: »

hi guys, im in a similar situation with littlewoods.
They are unable to provide cca & will not pursue but wont remove the default.

The account was opened on 19/04/2003 and defaulted on 25/09/2006

If your method works n-i-d can i plzzzz have a letter to send to these muppets
Cheers
Gez

Yes mate will post it here but just hold fire for now and get me the details as requested above and i'll find out for you....

Remember i'll need to know the exact type of littlewoods account and the exact date you took it out (shows on credit file)

gezza2k

Cheers m8, the actual start date from my credit file is 19/04/2003, and it was from Littlewoods (littlewoods.com)

Iv even sent them a F&F settlement offer of 10% to remove the default but just get no response lol

daryus

N-i-d (or anyone),

The Littlewoods letter (#1101) states:
"...your legal obligation not to take any action against me nor report anything to the credit agencies whilst the alleged account was in dispute."

Which act/regulation is this taken from?

never-in-doubt

daryus wrote: »

N-i-d (or anyone),

The Littlewoods letter (#1101) states:
"...your legal obligation not to take any action against me nor report anything to the credit agencies whilst the alleged account was in dispute."

Which act/regulation is this taken from?

Various mate such as - OFT, Banking Code & Consumer Credit Act!

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states;

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows: h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

Section 87(1) of the 1974 Act allows the creditor to send you a default notice giving you fourteen days from the date you receive it to pay the arrears. The default notice must contain all of the necessary information under the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 ('the 1983 Regulations'), which includes

• a statement saying the notice is a default notice served under section 87(1) of the 1974 Act
• a description of the agreement
• the name and address of both the debtor and the creditor
• details of the breach (i.e. late payment) and, if the breach can be remedied, the date by which it must be remedied or, if the breach is not capable of remedy, the amount required to be paid after the expiry of the specified date;

daryus

Thanks N-i-d,

I'm trying to work an angle on my situ: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1774151&highlight=fraud+regulation.

It's a long and drawn out case but I do know that the merchant has not deal with this correctly/legitimately. It was an online (Card Not Present) transaction and their bank told them that they were liable for the payment however they still pursued me (circumventing the card scheme rules) through the courts. I was incorrectly advised by my bank not to go to court so the merchant obtained a CCJ by default. The merchant has subsequently managed to hoodwink the courts.
I am innocent and I will never give up.
If you have any thoughts please keep me posted.

daryus

N-i-d,

Obviously the merchant cannot produce any signed agreements or evidence that I, the cardholder, made the purchase so how can I angle one of your earlier quotes:

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

Surely, this cannot apply to online contracts (or can it?).

Also, this 12 month contract was initiated without any signatures or the 3 digits on the back of the card. Is it a valid contract? Can a merchant legally initiate 12 month contracts in this slapdash manner?