PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

[warwick65]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

I am sure that Di will explain but it seems they did not have copies of the agreements signed at the time but did have copies of Dis signature. They then got a copy of the agreement that would have been signed and put the signature on it.

Sorry if I have got that wrong but that's how I read it.

So they lost even though they had copies of the agreements and the letter from MBNA. How does that work?

[MIKE770]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

FCA Nooooooooooooooooo Independent non Biased people = US! the only ones can be trusted.

[Diana M]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

it seems that they will do anything to prove a case

My claim was for £38k with a costs schedule of nearly the same amount from the other side.

Go figure.

Di

[Achilles]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

pity a full investigation not being taken into the events of this type of abuse, and recompense afforded, it would come under corrupt practices no doubt - just a thought.

Why hasn't somebody tried this? Who would you ask to investigate? Surely not the FCA?

[warwick65]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Fantastic news Di

I remember reading somewhere else a post by someone who claimed that all agreements by a certain CC company , which claimed where scanned copies were not and could be shown by getting out a ruler - I have always had my doubts but now maybe not.

It scares me that at least with one debt purchaser, it seems that they will do anything to prove a case, makes me worried to sign anything now.

[Diana M]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

If i recall correctly they were to say in the letter (for a cca request reply) that it was a recon. Can't remember who said they needed to though.

FCA CONC 13.1.4 (2)

1. (2) The firm can reconstitute a copy. It can do this by re-populating a template of the relevant agreement form with the details of the specific agreement taken from its records. If the firm does provide a reconstituted copy, it should explain that that is what it has done, to avoid misleading the customer that this is a contemporaneous copy.
   
   Source: https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/CONC/13/1.html
   
   Di

[Achilles]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

That is sometimes the case.

However in this instance, and this is why this case is so important, the two signed credit agreements they produced in evidence weren't "reconstituted" documents.

PRA Group (UK) Limited presented them to us and the court as scanned copies of the two original signed MBNA agreements with the prescribed terms & conditions on the back of both. The court found as fact this was not the case for each agreement and that both were therefore irredeemably unenforceable under s.127 (3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974..

Similarly with the Deeds of Assignment even though virtually totally unredacted Deeds were presented to the court, together with letters confirming the assignment from MBNA etc again the court found that that there was no evidence of assignment of our client's debt presented to the court.

So they lost even though they had copies of the agreements and the letter from MBNA. How does that work?

[MIKE770]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

pity a full investigation not being taken into the events of this type of abuse, and recompense afforded, it would come under corrupt practices no doubt - just a thought.

[mystery1]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

If i recall correctly they were to say in the letter (for a cca request reply) that it was a recon. Can't remember who said they needed to though.

M1

[R0b]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

PRA Group (UK) Limited presented them to us and the court as scanned copies of the two original signed MBNA agreements with the prescribed terms & conditions on the back of both. The court found as fact this was not the case for each agreement and that both were therefore irredeemably unenforceable under s.127 (3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974..

Just for my own understanding, had PRA re-constituted the agreement themselves and then suggested that the scanned copies were originals? If the agreement was a recon, would you not expect a witness statement from person who re-constituted the agreement to explain how they have done it?

What was the reason for forensic examination, was that for the alleged signature or the agreements or both?

Similarly with the Deeds of Assignment even though virtually totally unredacted Deeds were presented to the court, together with letters confirming the assignment from MBNA etc again the court found that that there was no evidence of assignment of our client's debt presented to the court.

Are you able to explain the judge's reasoning on this? Was there no evidence because account number and debt amount was not showing on the Deed of Assignment or was it the case that the judge felt that there was not sufficient information in the Deed of Assignment to show the debt account related to Diana?

[Diana M]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

exactly how do you tell the difference between a copy of an agreement and a reconstituted copy of the same agreement?

It's not always obvious. Some reconstituted documents can be very convincing, but after years of running forensics over literally hundreds of them you get to know what you're looking for.

We've seen recon Default Notices signed by an employee who didn't even work for the creditor at the time - they joined the company two years later when their career moves were checked on LinkedIn.

Sometimes we get out a ruler to measure a document which has been evidenced as the scanned reverse of another document yet it's a different size to. Not possible.

This is why we always tell a client to send a Subject Access Request to the original creditor to see what's on file. Because if the information isn't in the file then how can the debt purchaser produce it as evidence.

And so on.

Di

[MIKE770]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Quote:- Di!s comment:- When I first saw the two credit agreements which PRA produced as evidence even I thought they were genuine since the signature on both of them was mine although I didn't recall signing one of them. I wasn't even in the country on the day/date I was supposed to have done it. =

& as we (myself and O.H found out - DJs do not believe such an event can happen regarding signatures on paper (Agreements) that was never seen before? Oh! and that was PRA as known as these days! aka Aktive Kapital etc! via chivers/steve Glassborrow

[Diana M]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

PRA Group (UK) Limited presented them to us and the court as scanned copies of the two original signed MBNA agreements with the prescribed terms & conditions on the back of both. The court found as fact this was not the case for each agreement

When I first saw the two credit agreements which PRA produced as evidence even I thought they were genuine since the signature on both of them was mine although I didn't recall signing one of them. I wasn't even in the country on the day/date I was supposed to have done it.

My cross examination was spread over two days and in the end it was my overall evidence which was believed by the court.

Stale debts sued for on the back of 2 ‘reconstituted’ MBNA credit card agreements (May 1999 and October 2000) were held irredeemably unenforceable under CCA 1974. The evidence of an honest witness was preferred

Di

[Amethyst]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Excellent result! For future reference exactly how do you tell the difference between a copy of an agreement and a reconstituted copy of the same agreement? I've looked for the answer to this question but have struggled to find a definitive answer. Thanks.

I was responding to Achilles's question.

[Joanna C]

Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

Recons are usually not in the original format (eg not a leaflet/mailfold envelope etc), the information will be typed in rather than handwritten, no signature, and the terms will be in a readable sized font. It's usually pretty obvious tbh.

That is sometimes the case.

However in this instance, and this is why this case is so important, the two signed credit agreements they produced in evidence weren't "reconstituted" documents.

PRA Group (UK) Limited presented them to us and the court as scanned copies of the two original signed MBNA agreements with the prescribed terms & conditions on the back of both. The court found as fact this was not the case for each agreement and that both were therefore irredeemably unenforceable under s.127 (3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974..

Similarly with the Deeds of Assignment even though virtually totally unredacted Deeds were presented to the court, together with letters confirming the assignment from MBNA etc again the court found that that there was no evidence of assignment of our client's debt presented to the court.