Egg Card - CCA Flawed?

never-in-doubt

luvfreebeez wrote: »

Thanks for your reply NID.
..iv'e read the link you sent....do i interpret that as meaning I havent really got a legg (..sorry...) to stand on at the moment and that I cant use the term "approved limit" to pursue unenforcebility. Only the dca says that i should contact them regarding repayments as a matter of urgency, so not sure what they can do in the meantime while I await the outcome of the march case??

Thanks again.

Hiya

Don't worry i'll sort you a reply to send tonight, sit tight.... (am busy most of today so will do it later tonight and post here for you).

luvfreebeez

You're a gem,thankyou.

never-in-doubt

luvfreebeez wrote: »

You're a gem,thankyou.

Hiya

Just thinking about this there isn't much to argue right now until March as they are half right in what they say, i.e. there does not need to be a credit limit, however the fact is they are using a term not legally recognised within the CCA1974.

Have a read of the original CAG thread from page 1 (post 1) and see what letters they've sent off - may be better copying one of them.

luvfreebeez

Thanks for remembering to reply to me,thats very good of you.

p.s but whats CAG ...???

never-in-doubt

luvfreebeez wrote: »

Thanks for remembering to reply to me,thats very good of you.

p.s but whats CAG ...???

This here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ents-what.html

But read this first - interesting..... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2546962.html

Consumer_Action_Group_(CAG) wrote:

yes, its listed for trial first available date in march 2010, case management was today,

case is reserved for the specialist judge who will hear the case and it is High Court so sets a precedent too

scarednshakin

Just been on Consumer Action website and the date for the EGG hearing is the 4 June at 10.30 am. Hope it will be good news

Rich_F_2

luvfreebeez wrote: »

Hi!
Can anyone help please?

I sent off the letter to the dca handling my egg account as my cca says "approved limit". I have had the following letter back:

"I draw you attention to the date which you entered the agreement (18/02/02), denoting our obligation to fulfil your request under the cca 1974 and not the terms prescribed in that of the amendments of the cca 2006.Therefore under sec 78 relating to a regulated agreement for running-account credit, the credit limit is not a requirement under (b) the amount,if any,currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor. At the point of entering into the agreement, the amount payable would have been nil. You will find the rate of interest and repayment details in the terms and conditions enclosed.For these reasons we refute your claim that the agreement is lacking any of the terms prescribed by the cca 1974 and under s127 cannot be enforced,even by a court"

Any suggestions on where to go next with this,much appreciated!

Hi N-I-D. I'm in a similar situation to luvfreebeez. I sent the letter querying the use of "approved limit" and recieved the same latter as quoted above. Unfortunately, I've been unable to get back on here to ask for advice lately and so have been a bit slow with my response. Consequently Apex have written threatening me with courts and bayliffs. Anjy suggestions with what to respond with. I'm guessing that they won't try too much until the test case (June I believe?)

I can scan and post links to any letters if it helps.

Also, the statement of account recieved from Apex was a printout of a screengrab which looks pretty meaningless to me. Is this something worth throwing back at them? Any help greatly appreciated. The last letter has worried me slightly

never-in-doubt

Rich_F wrote: »

Hi N-I-D. I'm in a similar situation to luvfreebeez. I sent the letter querying the use of "approved limit" and recieved the same latter as quoted above. Unfortunately, I've been unable to get back on here to ask for advice lately and so have been a bit slow with my response. Consequently Apex have written threatening me with courts and bayliffs. Anjy suggestions with what to respond with. I'm guessing that they won't try too much until the test case (June I believe?)

I can scan and post links to any letters if it helps.

Also, the statement of account recieved from Apex was a printout of a screengrab which looks pretty meaningless to me. Is this something worth throwing back at them? Any help greatly appreciated. The last letter has worried me slightly

Hiya

as above - follow the CAG thread (http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ents-what.html)as they are the ones really dealing with this and have the relevant responses. I am a little too preoccupied to get too drawn into this, the reason I linked to it and started the thread was purely as it links to what I do over on the Unenforceability & Template Letters III thread.

But until the court date they will not obtain judgment against you......

scarednshakin

Got a reply from EGG today and wondered what to send back to them. The letter says

'You have alleged that we have failed to comply with Section 61 of the CCA 1974 by failing to include all of the terms prescribed by Schedule 6 of the CCA Regs 1983. This allegation is incorrect. The form of agreement used by Egg contains all of the relevant information prescribed both by Schedule 1 and by Schedule 6 of the Agreement Regs. In particular we would draw your attention to the following terms which include the terms prescribed by Schedule 6 of the Agreement regs.

a) The credit limit is set out in Condition 3 - 'Approved Limit' is specifically defined as the amount you can borrow from time to time on the account and is clearly understandable. The description of the credit limit complies with paragraph 8(b) of Schedule 1 of the Agreement Regs and there is no rwequirement under the CCA to use a particular term or phrase when describing the credit limit.

b) The required interest rates are set out in Condition 4 in compliance with Schedule 1 & 6 of the Agreement Regs; and

c) The repayment terms are set out in Condition 5.

Your credit agreement is not irredeemably unenforceable as you allege. Accordingly, we will continue to apply our normal procedures to your account, which may include reporting to credit reference agencies.'

And carries out about taking reasonable steps to seek repayment and if they have not heard from us in 8 weeks etc.

Any ideas what I should do next? Many thanks

DarkConvict

I think the CAG forums is your best bet on this as Niddy posted above. As it is playing on specific wording of whether it is or is not acceptable is not known in law.