Unenforceability & Template Letters II

never-in-doubt

Dojo_Jo_Jo wrote: »

See my thread today 4.19pm.

Ok enough now - please:D:D

Its not eBay

never-in-doubt

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/credit-and-loans/dealing-with-debt/article.html?in_article_id=495575&in_page_id=62

Main points are highlighted below.....

A series of cases were heard in the Manchester High Court last week that addressed what constitutes a 'true copy' of a loan agreement. The Consumer Credit Act requires that a lender must produce this when requested by the borrower, but borrowers and lenders have been in dispute about what constitutes a 'true copy'.

Further cases will be used to explore this on January 7, at which the presiding Judge Waksman is expected to give his ruling, according to a court official.

Over the past year claims management companies have been promising to help borrowers to get out of their debts in exchange for a fee. Some have argued that this is possible if the lender cannot produce the original loan agreement. However, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has stepped into the argument to clarify the rules. It says the bank can produce a 'true copy' of the original agreement if it wishes, which is simply an exact copy of the wording of the agreement signed at the time and which does not need to contain the customer's signature.

This will satisfy the requirements of the Act, but lenders should not lie about losing the original documents and try to cover their tracks by faking a 'true copy', the OFT said.

Dojo_Jo_Jo

QUOTE 'It says the bank can produce a 'true copy' of the original agreement if it wishes, which is simply an exact copy of the wording of the agreement signed at the time and which does not need to contain the customer's signature.

This will satisfy the requirements of the Act, but lenders should not lie about losing the original documents and try to cover their tracks by faking a 'true copy', the OFT said.' QUOTE

So how an earth would the average Joe know that the exact wording of what they originally signed many years ago to be able to compare with what they have been sent as a 'True Copy' .

God forbid that lenders would lie about it to cover their tracks!!!!!!

Surely only a signed and dated copy will constitute as proof that it is the original in a court of law?

never-in-doubt

Dojo_Jo_Jo wrote: »

So how an earth would the average Joe know that the exact wording of what they originally signed many years ago to be able to compare with what they have been sent as a 'True Copy' .

God forbid that lenders would lie about it to cover their tracks!!!!!!

Surely only a signed and dated copy will constitute as proof that it is the original in a court of law?

The average Joe wouldn't know but you're right, you can demand disclosure (CPR31.16) which would enforce the lender to produce a cca if they have one. If they say they do not then appear at court with it later, they will get a slapped bottom :rotfl:

Lenders do lie and also forge documents - did you see Captains post on last page where smile made a cca for him using the same handwriting as the person that 'agreed' the account?

Coincidence maybe? Or Fraud? Hmmmm ;)

See for yourself! #550

fermi

Re: Your for your letter dated xx/xx/xxxx.

Thank you for supplying me with a conjectured representation of an unexecuted and unsigned agreement that might have applied to the account you claim exists.

Please accept in return a conjectured example of what you would have received in payment should you have been able to provide a genuine copy of an enforceable agreement.





I hope that clarifies my position.

Best wishes,

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

never-in-doubt

fermi wrote: »

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Classic - I bet Cap'n will like that too (be careful though, that nuggat will send it - he's mad!)... :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

hax_2

What other banks/DCAs have been known to forge signatures?

I just sent a letter to a DCA today accepting compensation for an incorrect default after I filed a county court claim against them.

fermi

never-in-doubt wrote: »

See for yourself! #550

Oooooh! That isn't "conjectured" is it?

"Faked" is more accurate. :eek:

never-in-doubt

fermi wrote: »

Oooooh! That isn't "conjectured" is it?

"Faked" is more accurate. :eek:

Ooooh yes! The big giveaway is the date stamp and the date signed lol :rotfl::rotfl:

Cracks me up everytime I see it - and they think it is a lawful agreement! :eek:

never-in-doubt

hax wrote: »

What other banks/DCAs have been known to forge signatures?

I just sent a letter to a DCA today accepting compensation for an incorrect default after I filed a county court claim against them.

All of them mate

What dca is this and what value of compo? If you can't say then PM me matey