What now?.......................

swampduck

My husband has been in correspondence with Capital One/Frederickson/Bryan Carter to request a copy of his CCA.

The last letter requested a signature as 'their' records didn't show a match - he responded that it basically wasn't necessary and the latest reply quotes:-

""I acknowledge there is no requirement to provide a signature upon request of a Section 78) under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA). However since you have signed your letter, and we have identified that your signature does not match our records, it would be contrary to the Data Protection Act 1998 for us to not request for a copy of your current signatures.
To clarify, the distribution of statements and correspondence issued is in relation to the address held on file and not the signature. If we receive any correspondence signed by the customer directly or through authorised third parties, we are required to check signatures against our records, and to request proof of current signatures if they fail to match.
Please arrange for copy documents showing your current signature to be forwarded to us, and we will assist in your request.
To confirm we will not process your request until we receive a copy of your current signature. ""

This is a mega old defaulted debt and is no longer recorded on his credit files. We were hoping to tidy a lot of loose ends concerning old debts and don't know if we should pay, not pay, or ignore until they supply a CCA, or negotiate a reduced settlement .

So a bit of a deadlock issue here!!

Can anyone offer any suggestions on where to go from here?

Swampy

fermi

Days have long long gone since even the worst DCAs 'allegedly' lifted signatures, so honestly it's a bit of non issue now.

I would think you could either:

(a) Reply that you consider their requirements for a signature to be spurious and vexatious, and remind them that no matter their reasons for not complying, s78(6) renders the account unenforceable until they do.

or

(b) stop arguing what is a fairly mute point nowadays and see what they can cough up.

I would be a bit more inclined towards (b), but that is just my opinion.

sourcrates

Hi,


As there is no requirement to provide a signed document, its a bit of a moot point to be honest.


You could leave things as they are, as until they do respond to you, the agreement remains unenforceable.


As Fermi has said, if you want an exit strategy, then the choice is yours how you play it.