Unenforceability & Template Letters II

captainhaggis

never-in-doubt wrote: »

not hard really is it?

But that makes one wonder why these things have to go to court in the first place. The regs are there in black and white. The banks are clutching at straws.

captainhaggis

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Have a mooch here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8393768.stm

Interesting read there, NID. Thanks for posting.

Could one refer to that article in future letters to banks?

never-in-doubt

captainhaggis wrote: »

Interesting read there, NID. Thanks for posting.

Could one refer to that article in future letters to banks?

No need mate - wait til jan and the law will become a lot clearer! I always use it against the banks anyway, the fact that s.77-s.78 is crystal clear and leaves little for misinterpretation.....

All the OFT are doing is confirming that they know a lot of banks try to wriggle out of their responsibilities.

All will be clear in 3 weeks mate

never-in-doubt

This is funny - they will not stop will they?

Debt collectors hit out at advice websites

Debt collectors are planning ways to hit back against online consumer forums allowing people to share advice about dealing with debt problems and taking on financial institutions.

What next, illegal to post on a forum without permission :rotfl:

A section of the presentation entitled "What do they actually do?" said online forums "celebrate 'victories' against creditors, set up tallies of how much has been refunded in bank charges [and] provide standard template letters".

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Goodtimesahead

never-in-doubt wrote: »

They were last week mate - myself and Fermi were posting links the other day on this thread - go back a couple of pages and you'll see it...... (#505 )

No decision will be made until jan 2010.... but MBNA pulled out with 2 of the cases at the eleventh hour

Have a mooch here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8393768.stm

Excellent, lets hope they lose

I have passed on all your suggestions to my friend and I told him to read these threads to build his knowledge so he's not being led down the garden path by these credit card companies!

He mentioned also that his wife has had a Barclaycard since around 1999/2000 period and he said she may have applied for it online but can't be sure, does this have any bearing on whether the CCA would be enforcable or not? Also maybe they can use the 6 year period that they don't keep records back that far and would not have the original agreement etc etc ?

Wispa1

Hi - I need some advice in relation to "crappy one" please. On the 18th November I sent letter 1 requesting CCA to Capquest DCA. They responded on 20th saying the account is on hold for 28 days (until 18th December) while they obtain the information required. On the 27th capquest then sent a copy of a signed application form which literally has a name, address and signature from both parties with nothing else, ie no prescribed terms etc. I cancelled my dd as payment was due out on the 30th. On 1/12/09 "Crappy One" sent me a generic "terms of your agreement" with no signatures etc & could relate to anyones ac. I then sent the dispute letter to capquest dated 4/12/09 saying the ac was now in dispute as they had not responded to my request. I have just received a sols letter acting on behalf of Capquest for my payment of £30 which I did not make as I cancelled the dd & they want payment by 12/12/09.

I am not sure of what to say & to whom now as there are 3 parties involved. Please help & many thanks.

JohnCC_2

Hi. I've read through a lot of these threads, and I've seen people get their head bitten off for mentioning Park Lane, so please be nice! I have searched and not seen an answer. They called me today and spoke at length (!!) about this.

I have a First Direct Visa, taken out in around 2005 or before, with around £7700 on it. I've never missed a payment, but am paying the minimum amount (about £230) with around £105 of interest each month.

Park Lane say they can probably eliminate the debt. I need to pay £11 to cover the requests to the bank. They put their fee of £700 or so on to the card before it is frozen, and so it should be eliminated. If I screw things up such that they can't do their stuff (e.g. if I fire off letters to the bank in the meantime and try to claim myself) I'd have to pay them £50. They say the max risk to me is £66 therefore. They also say I'd get back the difference paid in increased interest rates over time as a payment, of which they'd take 20%. They told me I could do the application myself, but said that banks have departments of people to deal with this stuff and as soon as they see a template letter they will throw every trick they have at me to tie me up in knots (which I can believe).

Given that I'm pretty hopeless with paperwork and finances (how I got here in the first place), doesn't this sound like a reasonable way to go to ensure success? The "one bite at the cherry" rule they kept mentioning makes me think I don't want to blow it by messing something up.

Constructive advice, anyone? The letters look intimidating, especially with the mentions of DCA's, defaults and bailiffs! I'm in the process of getting a new mortgage too, so don't want to do anything to damage my rating which is currently good. Park Lane insist that my credit rating will not be affected by what they do.

50broke

Hi, hope you can help I have been on DMP since April, I CCA'd four of my creditors (pre 2007) and have had the following back:
Barclaycard, no CCA just a few pages of terms and conditions, and saying this is all you are having pay up.
MBNA: signed application form which looks like its pasted onto a page of t& C and their aplolgies for it being illegible.
Marbles: Signed Appliaction form, separate T&C
and finally Capital One, just a copy of a cedit agreement no boxes, no signatures, nothing.
Interesting the two defaults I have are both from sainsburys, as these were teken out in 2008. and have been passed onto DCA. The above four have not defaulted the account nor passed it on even though I am paying them a fraction of what they should be having.
Do you think it worth sending off for a SAR before I stop paying them. Advice please many thanks for your hard work.

50broke

sorry about spelling mistakes!!!!!!!!!

terimon

never-in-doubt wrote: »

hiya is this the case where you're ignoring them cos they haven't actually defaulted you as yet?

Yes that is the case. Just wondering if silence is still the best way forward or should i reply to Triton by showing that NatWest agree its unenforceable.

Cheers once again