Natwest Cca Request Help!

rbscoundrels

linzi_pinzi wrote: »

on the copy it has my hubbys full name but not the address what does it mean... sorry for being a bit thick but not very clued up about this


thanks

It means RBS have broken the law. The copy i was sent only included my name, but no address.

fermi

rbscoundrels wrote: »

I'm afraid omitting the borrowers name and address from copies is contrary to relevant legislation. Oh dear! Was your name and address included in the copy?

I'm afraid even the OFT can't seem to make their mind up exactly what constitutes a "true copy" to comply with a section 77/78 request.

The OFT have a habit of making responses like the one below when they are pressed. :rolleyes:

A ‘true copy’ of an agreement principally consists of the terms and conditions of the agreement and the statutory content of the agreement. The name, address and signature of the debtor do not have to be provided.

Additionally, the creditor must supply the total sum paid under the agreement by the debtor; the total sum which has become payable under the agreement but remains unpaid; and the total sum which is to become payable under the agreement by the debtor (the latter two must include the various amounts comprised in that total sum and the date when each is/was due).

However, the copy must be a copy. It need not be exact on immaterial points, but it cannot be a conjectured reconstruction.If the trader has no original copy, the trader will have difficulty showing that he has complied with the regulation by supplying a ‘true copy’, since nobody would know what was in the original. When the trader comes to enforce the debt in court, he needs to have a signed copy of the agreement in order to enforce. As the law stands currently he cannot otherwise.

In the absence of a copy of the original agreement someone's liability for a debt can only lead to further query. However in circumstances like this we would view it is as unfair practice under section 25(2) (d) of the Act and relevant to licence fitness if a trader failed to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate when a debt is queried or disputed.

My reading of Regulation 3(2) of the "Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983" is that the name and address of the debtor can only be excluded when the creditor is supplying a copy of an unexecuted agreement. Since a section 77/78 request requires a copy of the executed agreement, then this right to exclude "should" not apply.

Unfortunately, the OFT have been fence sitting on this.

The question of whether an agreement is enforceable in court is different to whether they have complied with the section 77/78 request.

Section 127(3) of the CCA74 clearly precludes the court enforcing an agreement made before 6th April 2007 that is not signed by the debtor or does not contain the "prescribed terms".

rbscoundrels

fermi wrote: »

I'm afraid even the OFT can't seem to make their mind up exactly what constitutes a "true copy" to comply with a section 77/78 request.

The OFT have a habit of making responses like the one below when they are pressed. :rolleyes:

My reading of Regulation 3(2) of the "Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983" is that the name and address of the debtor can only be excluded when the creditor is supplying a copy of an unexecuted agreement. Since a section 77/78 request requires a copy of the executed agreement, then this right to exclude "should" not apply.

Unfortunately, the OFT have been fence sitting on this.

The question of whether an agreement is enforceable in court is different to whether they have complied with the section 77/78 request.

Section 127(3) of the CCA74 clearly precludes the court enforcing an agreement made before 6th April 2007 that is not signed by the debtor or does not contain the "prescribed terms".

You are correct the name and address has to be included in a copy agreement pursuant to sec 77-79.

The text your quoting above is not a legal view. I have pushed the OFT on this with media help, their position now, is that the name and address is needed to comply.

Regards Paul

fermi

rbscoundrels wrote: »

You are correct the name and address has to be included in a copy agreement pursuant to sec 77-79.

The text your quoting above is not a legal view. I have pushed the OFT on this with media help, their position now, is that the name and address is needed to comply.

About ****ing time.

Do you have a link to an OFT statement to that effect?

rbscoundrels

fermi wrote: »

About ****ing time.

Do you have a link to an OFT statement to that effect?

No i don't.....I would advise anyone who receives a CCA request without their name and address included in it to write to Mr Henry Haitchison at the OFT asking if the copy document is compliant with legislation.

Paul

fermi

Handy to know Paul.

And nice to know that the OFT are reading the Regs the same as me now, even if they won't put it publicly in writing.

I wasn't trying to suggest in this thread that Natwest (RBS) were correct, but that the "powers that be" were fence sitting on the issue. If they are climbing off the fence now, then I'm happy.

rbscoundrels

Send this response off.



Dear Sirs,

Account Number: XXX

Re; your recent reply to my request under section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

I note that you have replied to the above by sending a recreated agreement including the terms and conditions. I must inform you that this is not sufficient to comply with the request and that your company is still in default under the act.

To clarify, just sending the Terms and Conditions is a breach of the Act and Regulations as, apart from the information that the Regulations provide that you may exclude, the copy must be a “true copy” of the agreement.

This breach of the agreement can be demonstrated as follows;

As you will know section 180(1) (b) authorises, “the omission from a copy of certain material from the original, or the inclusion of certain material in condensed form.” This refers to statutory instruments made under the heading Copies of document regulations and in this care in particular to SI 1983/1557.

Before leaving section 180 there are two other sections that should be remembered these are:

Section 2(2) (a) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not satisfied unless the copy supplied is in the prescribed form and conforms to the prescribed requirements;

And more importantly

Section 2(b) A duty imposed by any provision of this Act (except section 35) to supply a copy of any document is not infringed by the omission of any material, or its inclusion in condensed form, if that is authorised by regulations.

You will see that this quite clearly states that whilst certain items may be left out of the copy document the rest of the document must be in the form and contain all items as prescribed by the regulations.

Turning to the regulations regarding what may be omitted from these copies these are contained with SI 1983/1557.

The regulations state:
(2) There may be omitted from any such copy-
(a) any information included in an executed agreement, security instrument or other document relating to the debtor, hirer or surety or included for the use of the creditor or owner only which is not required to be included therein by the Act or any Regulations thereunder as to the form and content of the document of which it is a copy;
(b) any signature box, signature or date of signature (other than, in the case of a copy of a cancelable executed agreement delivered to the debtor under section 63(1) of the Act, the date of signature by the debtor of an agreement to which section 68(b) of the Act applies);

It is quite clear what can be omitted from the copy document, this again asserts that all other details of the agreement should presented in form and content as required by the regulations.

The requirements of the Agreement regulations 1983/1553 are very explicit in describing the form and content of an agreement and this as I have demonstrated also applies to the copy of any such agreement with the above mentioned proviso.

Nowhere within these regulations does it state that the borrowers name and address may be omitted, I understand that this is also the view of the Office of Fair Trading.

I hope this explains why your reply was unacceptable I await a True copy of my agreement and would remind you again that whilst the request has not been complied with the default continues. Furthermore, i also intend to notify both Trading Standards And the OFT of your non compliance.

Yours faithfully

fermi

I have a copy (version) of that letter saved, but my version doesn't have the updated bits regarding the OFT's opinion.

Time to update mine I think.

linzi_pinzi

thanks guys you r brill thats for all the advice and letter lv linzi

linzi_pinzi

hi every1 just ad a letter of natwest solicitors its a notice of discontinuance what does this mean ? x x