Creditor Can't Supply Copy of Default Notice

StopIt

ScaredWitless wrote: »

Thank you sourcrates for clariying this.

The CCA provided is too small and can't be read unless you have a magnifying glass!!

Some of the CCA is also fuzzy.

The debt purchaser has already said they cannot provide a more clearer or larger copy of the CCA.

So would this be a good defense if they try anything!?

That would likely depend on the judges' discretion. If THEY can read it, that defence would fall apart PDQ.


For the moment, you're running around defending something that isn't happening.


IF you get a letter before action, seek legal advice and drop your frantic Googling of anything you can throw at this. Honestly, it's not worth the stress and if anything did happen, you can act accordingly.

bengal-stripe

ScaredWitless wrote: »

The CCA provided is too small and can't be read unless you have a magnifying glass!!

You are clutching at straws, aren't you?

If the text can be read with a magnifying glass (or reading glasses), then it can be read.

IAmWales

Can you post a picture of the "ineligible" CCA?

sourcrates

ScaredWitless wrote: »

Thank you sourcrates for clariying this.

The CCA provided is too small and can't be read unless you have a magnifying glass!!

Some of the CCA is also fuzzy.

The debt purchaser has already said they cannot provide a more clearer or larger copy of the CCA.

So would this be a good defense if they try anything!?

You would have to engage a solicitor to put your case before the bench.

Your argument would center on "improper execution" of the agreement, sec 77/1 states that an agreement must be legible.

when you sign these agreements you are not asked to look at them through a magnifying glass are you, therefore common sense dictates any copy agreement obtained under a sec 77/79 request would need to meet the same criteria.

It would depend how far you are willing to go with this verses the cost to yourself.

ScaredWitless

sourcrates wrote: »

You would have to engage a solicitor to put your case before the bench.

Your argument would center on "improper execution" of the agreement, sec 77/1 states that an agreement must be legible.

when you sign these agreements you are not asked to look at them through a magnifying glass are you, therefore common sense dictates any copy agreement obtained under a sec 77/79 request would need to meet the same criteria.

It would depend how far you are willing to go with this verses the cost to yourself.

Thank you sourcrates.

Your the only one responding with excellent advice.

I'm waiting for the original creditor to come back with information under an SAR as I've sent them the £10 fee.

It will be interesting to see what I get back.

On another note, Max Recovery have said the default date is the 3rd August 2012, but MBNA tell me its the 7th September 2012.

If Max Recovery refuse to change the default date, where do I stand there?

StopIt

ScaredWitless wrote: »

Thank you sourcrates.

Your the only one responding with excellent advice.

I'm waiting for the original creditor to come back with information under an SAR as I've sent them the £10 fee.

It will be interesting to see what I get back.

On another note, Max Recovery have said the default date is the 3rd August 2012, but MBNA tell me its the 7th September 2012.

If Max Recovery refuse to change the default date, where do I stand there?

Unless if you've accidentally put 2012 instead of another, later year, an earlier default date is to your benefit.


If it is indeed later, you tell them to match the original default date as they're not allowed to be different.


Once the SAR is fulfilled, hopefully you'd have everything you need to decide what to do, including any potential defences against a court claim.


Oh, one final slight note on forum etiquette: Although you likely didn't mean it as such, but a passive aggressive swipe against anyone who isn't Sourcrates isn't welcome to those trying to help you in good faith.

ScaredWitless

StopIt wrote: »

Unless if you've accidentally put 2012 instead of another, later year, an earlier default date is to your benefit.


If it is indeed later, you tell them to match the original default date as they're not allowed to be different.


Once the SAR is fulfilled, hopefully you'd have everything you need to decide what to do, including any potential defences against a court claim.


Oh, one final slight note on forum etiquette: Although you likely didn't mean it as such, but a passive aggressive swipe against anyone who isn't Sourcrates isn't welcome to those trying to help you in good faith.

Thanks for the kind reply.

MBNA haven't cashed the cheque yet, as they only got it monday.

I understand they wont be able to supply with hard copy of default notice as they don't keep them all they can provide me with is a screenshot showing when it was created and sent.

What do I do if Max Recovery refuse to change their default date of 3rd August 2012 when MBNA will show its the 7th September 2012?

[Deleted User]

ScaredWitless wrote: »

What do I do if Max Recovery refuse to change their default date of 3rd August 2012 when MBNA will show its the 7th September 2012?

Celebrate I'd have thought, as it will drop off quicker.

StopIt

To change tack a bit, when was the last payment made?


I'm guessing it's before August 2012, so you're less than a year away from the debt being statute barred.


If so, keep the results of the SAR with you in file, and if a court claim is threatened, go from there, stating that you feel that the debt is unenforceable due to a bad CCA fulfilment.


Also, the default dates being a month out is inconsequential really, as the difference is to your benefit.

sourcrates

ScaredWitless wrote: »

On another note, Max Recovery have said the default date is the 3rd August 2012, but MBNA tell me its the 7th September 2012.

If Max Recovery refuse to change the default date, where do I stand there?

The date that matters is the default date recorded on your credit file, not in some letter from a debt collector.

What is the date of default on Noddle/Experian/Equifax ?