Cca Requests Updates Please

blind-as-a-bat_2

Originally Posted by RIANNA30
While we try to locate the full original agreement we will not be seeking to enforce the agreement. However, even if an agreement is unenforceable, the contract still has legal effect and is not void, the lender is merely prevented from seeking an enforcement order from the court.

rog2 wrote: »

Contract - what contract?

The 'agreement' is the contract, and is, currently, unenforceable. Even if they find it now, they would need to apply to the Courts for permission to 'enforce it'.

And yes - sending you somebody else's information is, indeed, a 'data protection issue. You might want to have a word with the Information Commissioner's Office on this - www.ico.gov.uk/

They are quoting wilson vs trust 2003, the lords stated almost to the letter while an agreement that does not contain the proscribed terms, or is signed by the debtor is not enforceable by the courts by virtue of 127(3), it does not however render the agreement invalid or void.

Im having this argument with Next at the moment.:rolleyes:

blind-as-a-bat_2

Wilson and others v. Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Appellant)
[2003] UKHL 40



164. Section 65(1) of the 1974 Act says that an "improperly executed regulated agreement is enforceable against the debtor … on an order of the court only". It is to be noted that the agreement is not void or unlawful. It is merely unenforceable except on an order of the court. Section 127(1) of the Act says, inter alia, that in the case of an application for an enforcement order under section 65(1) the court "shall dismiss the application if, but (subject to subsections (3) and (4)) only if, it considers it just to do so …." Subsection (3) bars the court from making an enforcement order under section 65(1) in a case where there is no document containing all the prescribed terms that has been signed by the debtor. So, in the present case, the court was barred by section 127(3) from making an enforcement order in favour of FCT. Its discretionary power to make an enforcement order which otherwise would have been conferred by subsection (1) had been excluded by subsection (3).

Of course for this to apply they have to show an agreement existed in the first place, a point Next seem to be missing as they never thought to ask for one

blind-as-a-bat_2

Bit of a mistake though quoting Wilson v First County Trust Ltd, i note they ommited to mention these bits

LORD NICHOLLS OF BIRKENHEAD in the House of Lords Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) paragraph 29


29. The court's powers under section 127(1) are subject to significant qualification in two types of cases. The first type is where section 61(1)(a), regarding signing of agreements, is not complied with. In such cases the court 'shall not make' an enforcement order unless a document, whether or not in the prescribed form, containing all the prescribed terms, was signed by the debtor: section 127(3). Thus, signature of a document containing all the prescribed terms is an essential prerequisite to the court's power to make an enforcement order.

Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2001] and in particular Sir Andrew Morritt’s, comment in paragraph 26

26. ……….” In effect, the creditor--by failing to ensure that he obtained a document signed by the debtor which contained all the prescribed terms--must (in the light of the provisions in ss 65(1) and 127(3) of the 1974 Act) be taken to have made a voluntary disposition, or gift, of the loan moneys to the debtor. The creditor had chosen to part with the moneys in circumstances in which it was never entitled to have them repaid;”

rog2

blind-as-a-bat wrote: »

Bit of a mistake though quoting Wilson v First County Trust Ltd, i note they ommited to mention these bits

Exactly, blind-as. :T :T

suewiththeblues

posting quickly before i pop out!!

CCA's mbna, and during the 12+2 period they wrote to say they have closed my account and passed to a DCA (was trying to negotiate fulll and finals)

today i recieve a compliments slip in the post and all it says is

'sorry for any inconvenience but we are unable to obtain a copy of your application'

and that is it!!!


so.......

do i cca the dca, whoever that may be?
or can i ring them and get them to write it all off and take the default off my file?

feel slightly smug but at the same time i know how this outfit operates!!!

10past6

suewiththeblues wrote: »

'sorry for any inconvenience but we are unable to obtain a copy of your application'

You don't want your "Application" you want the CCA

suewiththeblues wrote: »

do i cca the dca, whoever that may be?

No, they've received you CCA request, by the acknowledgement.

rose28454

I am helping my brother with CCA letters and have a query. He has a credit card debt with Morgan Stanley which seems to have become a Barclaycard Platinum account last September. It says on the bottom of the MBNA letters they are part of Barclays Bank Plc. Question is who does he write to for a copy of his CCA?? The statements he now get are from Barclaycard but he took the card out with MBNA. Confused??

10past6

rose28454 wrote: »

who does he write to for a copy of his CCA??

The CCA request goes to the company he's paying at present.

suewiththeblues

10past6 wrote: »

You don't want your "Application" you want the CCA

No, they've received you CCA request, by the acknowledgement.

so i send the follow up dispute letter and state that it was not the application i wanted?

rog2

suewiththeblues wrote: »

so i send the follow up dispute letter and state that it was not the application i wanted?

Just wait till the 12 working days have expired and send the 12+2 day letter.

IF they send you an application form, then there is another letter that you can send. Let us know what happens and I will post a link.