Sarafaye and London Scottish disputed debt

[sarafaye]

Hi all,

Just wanted to ask if I'm allowed to bring a thread of mine to here and if so, how do I get it here?

Would it be easier for me to copy and paste it? it's the thought of having to write it all down again.

It concerns restitution and it's on behalf of my Aunt who is in her 70's and has been paying a doorstep collector for 10 years @ £10 pw. Thing is, it's not her debt.

thanks in advance

[Amy]

Re: How/where to move a New Thread?

Cut and paste would save you having to retype it. Or you could just post a link to the original thread if you'd rather.

[sarafaye]

Re: How/where to move a New Thread?

Thanks Amy

I'll do the paste thingy. Not sure how to do a link.

[Tools]

Re: How/where to move a New Thread?

To 'do a link' you can hightlight and copy the page url from your browser(the one you want to link to) and then in your reply here right click and paste within the post.

Alternatively if paste does not work then click the icon above and add the link in there. Be sure not to have two http:// at the start of the link.

There you go, clear as mud.

[sarafaye]

Re: How/where to move a New Thread?

Hope this works. thanks tools



http://www.consumercreditsupport.co....ead.php?t=1149

[Amy]

Re: How/where to move a New Thread?

The link works, but you need to have registered with CCS to read it.

[Amethyst]

Re: How/where to move a New Thread?

I'm registered but still can't view the thread.

Doc file works okay though reading now.

[Amethyst]

Re: How/where to move a New Thread?

Okat thus far.... They have written off £1610,which was the outstanding balance, following your CCA requests.

The original loan was £7200 which was taken out in 1995 and payments have been made from 1995 to March 2007.

Your aunt disputes that she took out this loan.

In the letter dated 24th January (oops you left your address on honey will mod your posts till u take it off - can you reupload them once you have pls) they state a further three loans were taken out with LSB.

Are these disputed also ?

If not were these paid off prior to 28 February or could the £7200 consolidated them ?

[sarafaye]

Re: How/where to move a New Thread?

before I got to court stage, this turned up

[Amethyst]

Re: How/where to move a New Thread?

Well that 24th January letter is wrong then isn't it. The borrower only was credited with 2463 the rest was insurance and interest.

[sarafaye]

Re: Sarafaye and London Scottish disputed debt

She had one loan for 200.00 about 1993 paid and finished with. My Cousin (her daughter) took out this loan in 1995 paid it until she left home in 1997/8 to get married. My aunt told the collector she had anew address but he said the loan had been taken out at that address and has to be collected from there. My aunt did not question this as she believed it was o-k,
she is a little naive and too much of a gentle lady to have thought otherwise and so she continued making all those payments.

I only stepped in because I wanted to know why her name appeared on the payment book and subsequent docs including the "credit agreement".

Regarding the other aso called loan- the dates are not right. There has not been any other loan.

At the time of this loan, my Aunt had retired so certainly would not need PPI?

Saga not over yet. It gets better. still copying and pasting haha
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

[Amethyst]

Re: Sarafaye and London Scottish disputed debt

lol okay

So the loan is your cousins? wheres she/he in this mess then?

shall I shut up till ur done pasting ? (don't forget to take ur addy off the word doc files)

[sarafaye]

Re: Sarafaye and London Scottish disputed debt

O-k
another bit...

My Cousin was still paying for a while then discontinued when she married. My aunt had made that arrangement herself................ to help her along with married life etc etc and because she truly believed the debt now belonged to her since the collector had said so!!!!
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
The following are letters I then submitted to LS

14th March 2008

Margaret Hyde
Risk & Compliance
London Scottish Bank plc
201, Deansgate
Manchester
M3 3NW

LETTER BEFORE ACTION

Dear Madam


Reference Account: xxxxxxxx


Thank you for your letter dated 10th March 2008 in reply to my letter of 19th February 2008.
I have read its content and your comments, and I reply as follows.

1…As stated in my letter my Aunt did not/has not entered into any agreement with London Scottish, and you have failed to establish any fact as to that matter that she ever did.

2…You have stated that an agreement was entered into on 28th February 1995 and again have failed to establish who the parties were in/to that agreement.

3…No claim has been made to/for a change of address nor were you informed of a change of address, and is the logical reason you have no record of it.

4…Again you state it was xxxxxxxxxxxx that entered that purported agreement, but again failed to establish that fact.

5…You attempt to divert the issue away from the fact she was misled, bullied and coerced into believing that she had entered into this purported agreement, and have indeed taken money from her under this pretence, that she was indebted to London Scottish.

6…The reason no complaint has been made prior to my complaint on her behalf is quite simple to explain, up till the time of my discovery of the facts, my Aunt had been misled into believing that she was responsible for money owing, and it was she that had to repay it for over 13 years.

7…It is completely irrelevant how and when these payments were made, the fact is that my Aunt paid them under false impressions and false statements, these payments were taken from my Aunt under those false representations by making her believe she was the one responsible for them.

8…It is inconceivable that you ask for the name(s) of your collector(s), when you state different collectors are used, can you supply all the names and addresses of those collectors?

9…We now come to the purported conjectured false Credit Agreement, the document that you state you sent as a copy of the original, and is in my possession, it will be quite apparent to the court that this is indeed a conjectured, fraudulently produced document.
Specially designed to support and commit theft and fraud.

10…It is noted that the details of the purported parties to this agreement have been obliterated, there is no account number in the account number box, there are no signatures whatsoever in the signature boxes.

11…You clearly claim in your letter that this purported agreement is a “true copy” of the original, and yet it does not say it is “a copy” it says original.

12…If it was a “true copy” of the original, the names of the parties to the agreement would not be “blocked out”.London Scottish will have to explain to the court the reason why all details have been obliterated on the agreement supplied as under the terms of Consumer Credit Act regulations supply of documents, the only things you are allowed to omit in a "true copy" of the CCA agreement are the signatures of the parties......... these must be included on the supply of a requested copy of the "executed agreement"

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 cancellable 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);


13…This document produced is not only an offence under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 but an offence under the Theft Act, by way of false accounting. See below and the Fraud Act, following.


17. False accounting
(1) Where a person dishonestly, with a view to gain for himself or another or with
intent to cause loss to another,-
(a) Destroys, defaces, conceals or falsifies any account or any record or
document made or required for any accounting purpose; or
(b) In furnishing information for any purpose produces or makes use of any
account, or any such record or document as aforesaid, which to his knowledge is
or may be misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular;
he shall, on conviction on indictment, be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding
seven years.
(2) For purposes of this section a person who makes or concurs in making in an
account or other document an entry which is or may be misleading, false or deceptive in a
material particular, or who omits or concurs in omitting a material particular from an
account or other document, is to be treated as falsifying the account or document.


The Fraud Act 2006
1 Fraud
(1) A person is guilty of fraud if he is in breach of any of the sections listed in subsection (2) (which provide for different ways of committing the offence).
(2) The sections are—
(a) Section 2 (fraud by false representation),
(b) Section 3 (fraud by failing to disclose information), and
(c) Section 4 (fraud by abuse of position).
(3) A person who is guilty of fraud is liable—
(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);
(b) On conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine (or to both).
(4) Subsection (3)(a) applies in relation to Northern Ireland as if the reference to 12 months were a reference to 6 months.
2 Fraud by false representation
(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—
(a) Dishonestly makes a false representation, and
(b) Intends, by making the representation—
(i) To make a gain for himself or another, or
(ii) To cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
(2) A representation is false if—
(a) It is untrue or misleading, and
(b) The person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.
(3) “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—
(a) The person making the representation, or
(b) Any other person.
(4) A representation may be express or implied.
(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

7 Making or supplying articles for use in frauds

(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he makes, adapts, supplies or offers to supply
any article—
(a) Knowing that it is designed or adapted for use in the course of or in
connection with fraud, or
(b) Intending it to be used to commit, or assist in the commission of, fraud.


It is clear that this Conjectured agreement falls foul of these Acts especially sections 2 and 7 of the Fraud Act.

14…You state that you are fully aware that the agreement is unenforceable and yet you have “forced” that agreement on to my Aunt knowing full well it was unenforceable and forced her to pay money by deception.

15… You have not provided and cannot provide any evidence to support your allegation that my Aunt entered into any agreement with London Scottish, you have also stated in writing that she is/was a debtor of London Scottish which is a libellous written statement, wherein unless you can prove this fact, is libel and under the law is entitled to compensation for that libel. I await your offer to make amends under the Libel Act, and also remind you that libel action can be initiated through the County Courts, which I certainly will invoke, should I not receive satisfactory answers.

16…In 1995 my Aunt was a pensioner and would not have required Payment Protection Insurance, which is contained in this purported agreement, she was of course younger then as you say but nonetheless a pensioner at that time.

17…Finally the rate of interest is most truly an extortionate rate of interest and would be considered so by any court.

I await a much speedier response to this letter than my previous one, you have 7 days to respond, at the end of which, legal action will be initiated.


Yours faithfully

15th March 2008

Risk & Compliance
London Scottish Bank plc
201, Deansgate
Manchester
M3 3NW


For the immediate attention of Margaret Hyde.


Reference Account: xxxxxxx


Without Prejudice

Dear Margaret Hyde,

I follow up my letter of 14th March 2008 wherein I placed before you certain points and facts.

I write this letter with regard to the most serious of them all and that is, the purported Consumer Credit Act Agreement supplied under a section 77(1) request of that Act.

I have had this document looked at and examined by an independent witness. The conclusion is, that the document that you purport to be a true copy of the original agreement of my Aunts alleged agreement is in fact a copy of another customer/client(s) agreement with London Scottish which has been deliberately altered.

This has been done by

1…Blocking out by means of a computer system programme, or other similar device, the erasure of the original parties name, i.e the Principle Borrower

2…Box 3.A. All original financial information has again been erased by a computer system programme, or other similar device and details have been inserted by hand.

This is without doubt a document that has been deliberately, fraudulently altered and produced with intent to deceive and mislead for financial gain. A criminal offence under both The Theft and Fraud Acts as I have stated in my last letter.



Should London & Scottish not agree to the full payment of the claim schedule I have produced of which you are already in possession of within the time frame of the 7 days I stated in my last letter, you can be assured that proceedings will be issued without any further warning of intent.

You should take special note of the fact that I will be including in this claim and will be bringing to the courts attention this document and the manner in which it has been altered. There is no doubt that the court will refer this document to the appropriate authorities, ie the Secretary General, the Office of Fair Trading, the FSA and most importantly the Police for investigation.

The figure stated in my spread sheet schedule is none negotiable.

Yours faithfully


------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Sorry, this is before the last two letters.

19th February 2008

Risk & Compliance
London Scottish Bank plc
London Scottish House
Quays Reach
Carolina Way Salford
Manchester
M50 2ZY



For the immediate attention of Linda Bradburn

Reference Account: xxxxxxxxx

Dear Madam,

I now write to you on behalf of my Aunt xxxxxxxxxx with regards to all correspondence to and from you with reference to the above “Account and Reference Number”.
It is quite apparent from reading all documents and letters appertaining to this matter, that serious malpractices are and have been in operation in this matter, which include serious breaches of many laws, regulations and statutes, some of which are extremely serious.

I will place before you those facts, allegations, and claims.

Bullet Point 1.

My Aunt did not enter into the Credit Agreement ref number: 018458027 with London Scottish Bank, or London Scottish Finance Ltd or any of its subsidiaries.

Bullet Point 2.

London Scottish have failed to produce any contract or agreement of a contract or agreement.

Bullet Point 3.

London Scottish have coerced, bullied, misled, taken and received monies from my Aunt by these means.





Bullet Point 4.

With regard to the purported agreement sent to my Aunt, it is perfectly clear that this a conjectured agreement that has been constructed by way of fraudulent actions, and supplied with the intent to again mislead that this document is an actual legal document when it is far from that fact.
It is in fact a fraudulently submitted document and falls foul of the New Fraud Act 2006 and an offence under that Act.

Fraud by false representation
Section 2 and sub sections 11 to 17
Also Sections 4, 5 and 7 of the aforesaid Act.
I would suggest you read that Act
Bullet Point 5

The consistant actions of forcing my Aunt to believe she owed money to the London Scottish Bank and taking that money is an offence under the Theft Act 1968.

Bullet Point 6

She has been misled and bullied for over 12 years into believing that she was a debtor of London Scottish Finance Ltd.

Bullet Point 7

My Aunt is a mild mannered old lady and it is quite easy to understand, how she was able to be cajoled, misled and forced into this mistaken belief that she was responsible for this unfounded fraudulent agreement.

Therefore I give London Scottish 14 days to refund all monies paid by my Aunt compounded at the EXTORTIONATE rate of interest purported to be payable under this fraudulent agreement of 91%.

Failure to do so will result in my presenting this “purported agreement” and all relevant facts and letters to the Fraud Squad of the local police force for them to take all the necessary actions under the New Fraud Act 2006.






This will not bar my advising my Great Aunt from taking civil action to retrieve all the monies plus interest due to her.

The other minor points appertaining to such things as Credit Reference Agencies will be discussed at a later date, this will involve a separate claim for Libel

I await your speedy reply and proposals.

[Amethyst]

Re: Sarafaye and London Scottish disputed debt

Okay

My Cousin was still paying for a while then discontinued when she married. My aunt had made that arrangement herself................ to help her along with married life etc etc and because she truly believed the debt now belonged to her since the collector had said so!!!!

The first part of that -- your aunt was aware the debt was your cousins and when your cousin moved out to get married your cousin paid via your aunt for a while, then your aunt took over the payments 'to help her along with married life etc etc'. So basically your aunt agreed with your cousin to pay the debt ? Was this discussed agreed with your cousin or was it purely by default your aunt ended up paying your cousins debt cause she moved out and didn't amend details with the creditors to change payment arrangements, and your aunt believed the collector when he said it wsn't possible to move the debt to your cousins new address ?? was she a guarantor on the loan and was it taken out originally solely in your cousins name completely independently from the loans your aunt had herself ? What is your cousins position on the matter now ? These letters and collections actions being taken - are they being taken directly against your aunt ?


Re the allegations about the credit agreement. What has lead you to those conclusions ?

[sarafaye]

Re: Sarafaye and London Scottish disputed debt

Finally to bring it all up to date, this was referred to solicitors who in turn applied for funding through legal aid. Unfortunately this was rejected.

So, I had considered the lesser evil of keeping it in small claims and aiming for misrepresentation.

If this was my own claim I would have gone the whole adventure for full restitution, but I really need to at least try for some return for my Aunts sake.

She is caring for my very frail Uncle with severe heart problems who is also recovering from a series of minor strokes.

I think that just about covers most of it.

Thank you for your patience.