Unenforceability & Template Letters III

Rainbow_Liberty

Hi Niddy, hope you have been having a restful weekend.

I received a reply from Egg on Saturday, the last letter I sent to them was about selling the account whilst in dispute and this is the reply I have received. Hope you don't mind but I've emailed it to you for your expert eye to cast a glance over if you could.

carol01

macka09 wrote: »

I am going to send off for a CCA now but I'm unsure where to send the letter due to me having a ccj. The loan was from Lloyds but it's a Nottingham court that issued the ccj??

hiya macka09
it may be better to wait for n-i-d to come and advise you but i do remember him saying that it is best to leave ccj debts alone see here http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=32736317&postcount=2661 hope this helps

macka09_2

Hi I a previous post a member has said that you can't file for a CCA on my Lloyds debt because they issued a CCJ but I might be able to on any credit cards or store card debt? What actually can happen using a CCA?

carol01

macka09 wrote: »

Hi I a previous post a member has said that you can't file for a CCA on my Lloyds debt because they issued a CCJ but I might be able to on any credit cards or store card debt? What actually can happen using a CCA?

have a look at the first couple of pages your debts need to be pre 2007. using a cca if the cannot produce the original signed agreement then the most they can do is give you a default on you credit file. you dont pay the debt back but they canot take you to court without having the original. but the default will stay on your credit file for 6 years, it may be hard to get credit hope this helps

never-in-doubt

Morning Jen,

I was going to stick to PM's regards to responses to Lloyds, but as is clear from your letter they already read my thread (Hi Lloyds :wave:) so I thought it'd be best to put the response on here, so everyone can see the flaws in their response, and their inability to follow basic procedure and comply with varying legislation.

Send the response below, back to Lloyds.

Dear Sirs,

Account No: XXXXXXXX

I write with reference to your letter dated 21 May 2010, your final response in the matter. I'd like to not only correct you, but also draw your attention to the following points;

You start by saying you don't agree with my complaint which is perfectly understandable and within your rights. You then move on to try and make me believe that you'd fully complied with my s.78 request, which for the avoidance of doubt, you never. Let me elaborate;

- You should send a copy of the original credit agreement
- You should send a copy of the terms in place from outset
- You should send a copy of the current terms (if applicable)
- You should send a statement of account

Of the list above, granted you did send me some of the documents however just because you sent them does not mean that you complied with s.78 - far from it. I did explain in my last letter to you dated 13 April 2010 why I felt that you'd failed in your obligation yet you feel the need to question my motive using some half-hearted excuse, yet again trying to wriggle your way out of a tight situation. In my letter I clearly explained why I felt the documents you sent me were illegible, none moreso than the following 3 points;

1. The handwriting was not mine
2. The address is incorrect
3. The signature is a cut/paste

Rather bewilderingly, you then go on to claim that "I had not provided any evidence to support my allegation" - unless i'm missing something, the three points above is clearly my evidence - my word is my evidence. How on earth is it possible to dispel an allegation that was made by me, claiming that you had fabricated an agreement using details from your systems? The only evidence I have is my word, the fact I stated these points is enough in itself to warrant a full scale investigation into departmental fraud, something I am sure the local press would be extremely interested to hear about. If someone tells you that a form purporting to be theirs, has handwriting that is not theirs then that is grounds enough and ample proof to take to any civil case I may deem necessary.

Yet again I see you are using the same excuse by claiming that account usage constitutes acknowledgement of enforceability. Let me make myself crystal clear - NO IT DOES NOT. The issue of whether the account was used, repaid and then reused does not come into the provisions of s.78, s.127(3) & s.65(1), as we both know full well. Please stop trying to scare me into submission, it simply will not work. The only thing that makes an account enforceable is the provision of a legible, compliant Consumer Credit Agreement that encompasses the prescribed terms and comes signed by the lender and the debtor. Nothing more, nothing less.

Amusingly, you then go on to state that "You are concerned to learn that I may be obtaining incorrect advice regarding my legal rights, from an internet website". I'd like to thank you for your support, it is nice to know that some of the banks read this website, however I just wish they would also use it as a learning tool to equip their advisers with the necessary legal knowledge in order to do their jobs. How dare you insult the author of such information when it is quite clear that you are in the wrong, time and time again. I am sure the author and various members would be more than happy to act on a test case should you wish to take such a legal stance, bearing in mind we are incorrect, right?

Please do not waste any more of my time. I made a simple, lawful request which you have failed to adhere to. I shall not bother reporting you to the governing bodies, there really is no need as far as i'm concerned. As you so rightly state in your letter, all that you can do is report the account conduct to the Credit Agencies (be my guest), issue a Default Notice (only one, you used plural - again, feel free), instruct a DCA to act (feel free, similarly, they will have no option but to return the account to you when they too fail to fulfil their s.78 request) and demand repayment (feel free to demand all you like!). So as you can see, there really isn't a lot that you can do now, that you've not already tried in the past.

The only way to get yourself out of this hole and back in control is by issuing me a copy of the alleged agreement that I am purported to have completed, in my own handwriting signed by myself and someone from Lloyds TSB. Without such documentation, then this account remains in default and is unenforceable - without question of a doubt.

This is my final response on the matter. Unless you can lawfully fulfil my original s.78 request, I consider this matter closed and you would do well to follow suit. I do expect you to write back and confirm that no further action will be taken and that the account is now closed. I will not correspond with you any further and any threats made by Lloyds will be averred and unlawful and vexatious with a counter-claim forthcoming.

Yours faithfully




Sign digitally

elsie52

I take my hat off to you Niddy - what a letter !! That's telling 'em

:T:T:T:T

jen_br

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Morning Jen,

Good morning to you too and thank you!!

never-in-doubt

jen_br wrote: »

Good morning to you too and thank you!!

As you can see, who is right and who is wrong?

Are you a little more happier now Jen?

jen_br

never-in-doubt wrote: »

As you can see, who is right and who is wrong?

Are you a little more happier now Jen?

Of course, until they call me today quoting you on the phone lol

never-in-doubt

macka09 wrote: »

I am going to send off for a CCA now but I'm unsure where to send the letter due to me having a ccj. The loan was from Lloyds but it's a Nottingham court that issued the ccj??

You cannot CCA a lender once they have obtained judgement, sorry - forget it. The only thing you can do is consider fighting the validity of the actual CCJ.

Basically unenforceability stops a lender obtaining a CCJ, as you already have one then it's too late to now attempy unenforceability, otherwise you should have used this as a defence to the CCJ claim by the lender.

Sorry