Unenforceability & Template Letters III

never-in-doubt

roadster wrote: »

Morning NID

Busy as ever, top chap.

Heres a thought - what kind of percentage of the uk is currently going through unenforceability. How much could be unenforceable are we talking millions of £££. This could be bigger than the bank charges reclaim, that was until the case last year. Do you think that there could be a change in the law to somehow amend the CCA to make all agreements enforceable no mater what.

Just a thought - probably thinking and talking bull sh*t.

Cheers pal

Morning matey - you alright?

I'd guess there is a high percentage claiming unenforceability - even the top analysts are saying it is a multi million pound industry (those firms that charge for their [STRIKE]services[/STRIKE] scams) It won't be bigger than bank charges i'd not have thought but that is due to one being morally more important that the other (to the hypocrites etc)....

They did make changes to the law mate (CCA2006 which repealed s.127 for instance), but fortunately law is not retrospective so it starts from the day (or in future) that it was passed - not in history/backdated! :rotfl:

never-in-doubt

roadster wrote: »

Morning NID

By the way, how come you've been here since January 2004 but only made 67 posts? :rotfl:

You must be one of the longest standing members here - surely in the top 100....? Did you register, make one post then take a 5 year sabbatical?

in_to_deep

morning nid

did you get my e mail re 2 cca s

thanks

never-in-doubt

in_to_deep wrote: »

morning nid

did you get my e mail re 2 cca s

thanks

was that you? the CCA ones....? :rotfl: :rotfl:

sorry I never knew who it was so didn't do anything with them! Hold fire.....BRB

never-in-doubt

in_to_deep wrote: »

morning nid

did you get my e mail re 2 cca s

thanks

Hiya

Ok:

Abbey - although the prescribed terms are shown down the left of the page, it is an application form and it is not signed by them - its unenforceable.

Crappy1 - No prescribed terms and it is an application form also not signed by them - but it does link to additional terms just above the signature field at the bottom.....

Basically both are currently unenforceable and you'd be sending this back to them both: CCA Query


edit - sorry for typo!

in_to_deep

sorry did you say enforceable or unenforeable

underworld

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Right mate - that changes things somewhat!

Page 1 - clearly shows the date of 2002 as you state and does not contain any of the prescribed terms. This is the original from 2002 (part of the application) - it is not the CCA therefore they have failed so far to comply with your s.78 request as part of this means they should be sending terms that were in place at the time the account was opened along with a copy (or recon) of the agreement you signed at the same time. They sent a copy of the application, neither of what they should be sending.

You need to have a close read of page 1 (I cannot see it too well) and tell me if you can see anywhere words to the effect of 'I agree to the attached Terms & Conditions' or 'Please refer to point XX of the terms' - basically anything that would suggest the document links to another document. If not, does it mention anywhere that it is page 1 of X?

Page 2 - clearly does have the prescribed terms but now I know what it is it changes things. This cannot be used as the CCA - to comply they should send a copy of the original that was in place at the time you took the agreement, i.e. the reverse (linked page) to Page 1 mentioned above.

As you say this is a replacement card letter and therefore is not the CCA as requested under s.78.

So, as things stand it is unenforceable :T - however if you can confirm the bits in red above, i'll advise more.......

Morning NID,

Can't see anything that links to another document at all nor does it say page 1 of how ever many nor does it mention attached Terms & Conditions.

It does refer to the consumer credit act 1974 in the signature box though, not sure if this is relevant.

I await your advice and thanks again, don't know how you do it :think:

never-in-doubt

in_to_deep wrote: »

sorry did you say enforceable or unenforeable

sorry lol, just realised my mistake - check last post again and you'll see edited version lol...... they are both UNENFORCEABLE

never-in-doubt

underworld wrote: »

Morning NID,

Can't see anything that links to another document at all nor does it say page 1 of how ever many nor does it mention attached Terms & Conditions.

It does refer to the consumer credit act 1974 in the signature box though, not sure if this is relevant.

I await your advice and thanks again, don't know how you do it :think:

Hiya

Both are currently unenforceable then - send this to both and cease repayments (assuming you already have) but bear in mind you will get defaulted if you do this (perfectly normal)...

CCA Query

The signature box CCA bit means nada - it should contain prescribed terms - it does not so it is unenforceable

Don't know how I do what mate? lol

roadster

never-in-doubt wrote: »

By the way, how come you've been here since January 2004 but only made 67 posts? :rotfl:

You must be one of the longest standing members here - surely in the top 100....? Did you register, make one post then take a 5 year sabbatical?

Hi Matey

Back in 2004 this was just a forum for people who posted money saving tips and ideas, and all i did was read them and used them as and when i needed to. Also used the site a lot for info when bank charges were being reclaimed 2006 and managed to get a bit back from LTSB. :j
Yea i probably am one of the first 100 lol - imagine if youd been here since then with the amount of posts you put in would probably run into 100s of thousands.