cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQUEST

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

Either way all my Letters i wrote to lloyds stated at the bottom of each letter all communications will be recorded and at the top of my notices i sent, it had ''notice to principal is notice to agent notice to agent is notice to principal'', which if the cleaner signs and reads the letter/notice it is deemed served on the MD of the said corporation or any other party involved or to be involved, surely QC sols, if they actually had the paperwork would have read this on my original paperwork.

there is also this video which i find shows people that there is no law on it , please excuse the 'freeman' 'stuff' at the beginning http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dLf57DrAsk

the policeman i had at my home last week also said i can video and record anyone (i have been recording the anti social neighbors, including the kids, with no adverse police comments), if they while being video request not to be, you should oblige. infact the police have requested copies of the hours n hours of recordings i have as evidence.

i would also say that as i can see already in my case that something is not right with the way this is being handled i have recorded this for my own information and for clarity of what was said, not to actually use the tape recording in court. ....... i can still make a written statement of what was said in the call, the recording just allows 'me' to make sure it is factually correct.......... hence my question on should i send a confirmation of what was said in the call to the solicitors
In fact the police videoed me the whole time he was in my house last week via a camera on his chest.

Thanks guys for your input

[Gorang]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2000/2699/note/made

The Telecommunications (Lawful Business Practice) (Interception of Communications) Regulations 2000

EXPLANATORY NOTE

(This note is not part of the Regulations)

These Regulations authorise certain interceptions of telecommunication communications which would otherwise be prohibited by section 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. To the extent that the interceptions are also prohibited by Article 5.1 of Directive 97/66/EC, the authorisation does not exceed that permitted by Articles 5.2 and 14.1 of the Directive.The interception has to be by or with the consent of a person carrying on a business (which includes the activities of government departments, public authorities and others exercising statutory functions) for purposes relevant to that person’s business and using that business’s own telecommunication system.Interceptions are authorised for—

• monitoring or recording communications—
  • to establish the existence of facts, to ascertain compliance with regulatory or self-regulatory practices or procedures or to ascertain or demonstrate standards which are or ought to be achieved (quality control and training),
  • in the interests of national security (in which case only certain specified public officials may make the interception),
  • to prevent or detect crime,
  • to investigate or detect unauthorised use of telecommunication systems or,
  • to secure, or as an inherent part of, effective system operation;
  
  
• monitoring received communications to determine whether they are business or personal communications;
• monitoring communications made to anonymous telephone helplines.

Interceptions are authorised only if the controller of the telecommunications system on which they are effected has made all reasonable efforts to inform potential users that interceptions may be made.The Regulations do not authorise interceptions to which the persons making and receiving the communications have consented: they are not prohibited by the Act.A regulatory impact assessment is available and can be obtained from Communications and Information Industries Directorate, Department of Trade and Industry, 151 Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W 9SS. Copies have been placed in the libraries of both Houses of Parliament.

self explanatory in my mind

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

Oh and when i called them they state that they are recoding the calls so it would seem daft to allow one side a recording and not the other, would it not??

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

self explanatory in my mind

But the bit you quoted The interception has to be by or with the consent of a person carrying on a business (which includes the activities of government departments, public authorities and others exercising statutory functions) for purposes relevant to that person’s business and using that business’s own telecommunication system.Interceptions are authorised for—


that would say to me it is only relevant to a business and i am not...... ????????

[Gorang]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

that would say to me it is only relevant to a business and i am not...... ????????

The solicitor you are phoning is a business

But Like I said above please satisfy your own mind

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

oh ok i see what you mean now........ like i say im not intending to use the recording in court, but would you say i should write a letter to the sol's confirming what was said in the call????

Please dont think im disregarding your very kindly given advise, just trying to get my head round the different laws and my own experiences that say that we can record calls etc.

[Gorang]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

Oh and when i called them they state that they are recoding the calls so it would seem daft to allow one side a recording and not the other, would it not??

Sorry I missed your post here

Does the message say that "the calls ARE recorded" or does it say "the calls MAY be recorded" if it says calls ARE recorded then I would ask for a copy of their own recording and play it back to them as they will NOT be able to deny it or get it thrown OUT of court if it is part of your defence

The way I see it is if you are told at the start the call is/may be recorded then you have the choice to hang up if you don't want to be recorded, but if your NOT told the call IS being recorded then you have had the choice taken away from you

But as I said this is only my thoughts and interpretations

[Gorang]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

Sorry our posts are crossing here lol

oh ok i see what you mean now........ like i say im not intending to use the recording in court, If you can get a copy of the recording from them then I WOULD use it against them but would you say i should write a letter to the sol's confirming what was said in the call???? Personally I wouldn't at this stage, I would give them a bit of time to respond first, BUT that is only me so could be worth others view as well

Please dont think im disregarding your very kindly given advise, I don't think that at all so don't worry as I have a VERY thick skin lol just trying to get my head round the different laws and my own experiences that say that we can record calls etc.

IMHO the law IS how you interpret it and how a judge will interpret it, as it is seldom black and white so its good to get different points of view to understand it better

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 in general prohibits interception of communications by a third party, with exceptions related to government agencies. A recording made by one party to a phone call or e-mail without notifying the other is not prohibited provided that the recording is for their own use; recording without notification is prohibited where some of the contents of the communication—a phone conversation or an e-mail—are made available to a third party. Businesses may record with the knowledge of their employees, but without notifying the other party, .....


this is exactly how the law was explained to me, so long as dont divulge the call to a 3rdparty then im ok................ I only think i should confirm in writing what was said, not ask any further questions, as that way i can then use that letter in court??? its about them not complying with CPR or PAP by not having the docs, which makes them look bad ???

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

double post, sorry

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

i received a letter form drydens yesterday confirming my 'request for further information''

they have relayed my request to their client for documents and the file is now on hold pending their response. my immediate response to proceedings in therfore not required at this time.

they will respond to me further when they have received their clients reply and allow no less than 14 days to review the documents and to file my response to the proceedings.




so as tomorrow is the last of the seven days i have just called them again to chase up the paperwork, they told me they have had electronic communication from QC sending over my name, address, phone number AND an account number,.(organized then :tinysmile_aha_t... so i asked if they had ANY paperwork there in their possession at all in relation to this matter, the woman said, NO, basically just our clients 'word' as they are a bug customer of ours.

I then asked what the account number was that they put on the PoC as the lloyds account number, oh thats QC's reference number, sorry about that........ so again i asked if they had seen sight of any of these doc's listed in the PoC, they said no we trust our client and we do NOT need to comply with CPR or pre action protcols by having them or supplying them with our claim.

I then asked if their client had indicated in anyway if they will be making these docs available to them before tomorrow as thats when the 7 days run out, she said they had not indicated either way, but said QC are normally good at keeping paperwork but arent very good on time scales .



so is this now the time to form my embarrassed defense to the court please guys........ ive been really busy this week with my daughter and my boiler packing up, but will be reading up on this here a bit later, sorry for keep asking questions, any help in pointing me in the right direction for forming a defense would be very helpful, that is if this is where this should be going now. or do i apply to the court to have it struck out for non compliance, not forgetting my 4 year out of date CCA request from the orginal creditor......... there just seems a few options and im not sure which one is best for me right now, like i say ill be ready plenty tonight.

kindest regards

[Gorang]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

1; claim for the sum of £3,ooo'ish in respect of monies owed by defendant on credit agreement with lloyds, under ACC no (the account number is not on any original paperwork i have!! and means nothing to me) upon i didnt pay.(well i wouldnt, llyods have had 4 years to NOT come up with a pucka CCA)

2;a default notice was 'served' on me......... nothing zip diddlysquat. ........whats the 'legal' meaning of 'served' ?

3; by virtue of a sale agreement with lloyds and the claimant the claim vested in the claimant who has a genuine commercial interest. The defendant has been notified of assignment by letter......... nope first ive heard of any of this.

Can you post up the EXACT wording that was on the claim (minus amounts and account numbers) and also post up the EXACT wording you have submitted in your acknowledgment as well please (minus amounts and account numbers)

If you can get this posted up for me then I can put a embarrassed defence together for you if you want

What date does your defence need to be submitted to court by????

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

internet has been down, ggrrr............. will post up asap, thank you

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

When i did the acknowledgement i just filled out the online MCoL form via the tick boxes to defend all of the claim, i did not write anything.

will post up the claim form in a few mins

[sarnie2109]

Re: cca REQUESTED FROM LLOYDS IN 2009 NOTHING AS YET...... NOW COURT PAPERS FROM CAPQ

i returned acknowledgement to the court on the 11th via MCoL, the sols 7 days for the CPR31.14 are up today. i have till the 25th to file my defense.

Many thanks for your offer to help me with my defense, could i ask why you do not suggest having it struck out?