reconstituted agreement

[winner12]

Hi
Just got the above from CAP 1 they dont have a valid CCA
whats the next step

[Curlyben]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Under Carey this is acceptable, BUT they must supply the T&C's at inception, the current T&C's, you details at the time of opening the account and of course the agreement must still comply with CCA.

[winner12]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Thanks Curly
They have supplied loads of T&C`s and have stated its all adequte and they wont enter into any more correspondance
So is it time to let it go its hard to know who to pay they return my payments and dont cash my cheques either
When I complained about 2 DCA chasing me they did not appologise
They just said Credit Solutions would be in touch shortly but I have had no contact from them for months now and I have not been able to pay anyone for nearly 4 months now
Help!

[winner12]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Forgot to mention I did not get this info when I did a SAR request just an application form

[Angry Cat]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Hi
Just got the above from CAP 1 they dont have a valid CCA
whats the next step

There is nothing showing;
where's the link?

[winner12]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Sorry
Which link

[Angry Cat]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Sorry, misread your post.

I thought that you had meant to post up a copy of the recon but failed to do so.

What is the date of the application for credit?

[winner12]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Hi I think we need more coffee this morning
the agreement is June 2000 its a long running saga ask Crispy
I only want Cap 1 to accept my money,so am trying to get leverage and pay them pro rata
Its a year now and 2 DCA later both chasing me at once and a complaint to the FOS (no joy gave up with that one)
all other creditors accepted my offers
Cap 1 have had all my SOA info
I thought after reading loads of CCA threads to tackle it that way
But alas I am still stuck
The Debt stands at about £4200 now
Have tried to pay them direct
I think it was Debt Star who said they might refuse my payments
I dont even think Cap 1 know who should be collecting the debt either
Its frustrating and confusing

[Angry Cat]

Re: reconstituted agreement

But,if they do not hold a valid agreement, why would you want to pay them?

[winner12]

Re: reconstituted agreement

I suppose its the honourable thing to do
Being the honest person I am
But because they have been such pains in the Butt I am at a loss what to do
Should I just stop paying and wait and see if they take me to Court
And would they win on the grounds of reconstituted
What would my defence be

[basa48]

Re: reconstituted agreement

But,if they do not hold a valid agreement, why would you want to pay them?

Indeed, and just for clarification - whilst 'reconstituted' rubbish may qualify for compliance with s78, HJ Waksman in Carey goes to great lengths to explain they would not satisfy as proof "that he did indeed enter the agreement by signing a document which was a properly executed agreement (“the Proof Purpose”)" and in fact where an agreement has been varied (nearly all have) the creditor MUST still provide a copy of the original agreement.

[winner12]

Re: reconstituted agreement

So in that case basa48
Should I just send the CCA dispute letter,the debt with the 2 DCA was for collection not sold on which was one of the reasons I sent a SAR and then CCA
The Debt is still with CAP 1

[basa48]

Re: reconstituted agreement

So in that case basa48
Should I just send the CCA dispute letter,the debt with the 2 DCA was for collection not sold on which was one of the reasons I sent a SAR and then CCA
The Debt is still with CAP 1

You could send the following to BOTH the DCAs:

Dear Sir/Madam

You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself.

I would point out that I do not acknowledge any debt to your Company and therefore require you to substantiate this claim by providing the following documentation before I correspond further:

1. As it is not clear from your letter, confirmation you are merely acting for the original creditor, or if this is an assigned debt, a copy of the executed deed of assignment from the original creditor. (this para could be edited or omitted)
2. A true copy of any original signed executed credit agreement.
3. A copy of any Default Notice for the account.
4. A FULL Statement of account.
5. A fair processing notice.

Take note at this stage, that any legal action you may contemplate will be both vigorously defended and contested.

Further to the above, please ensure that any contact by yourselves is made in writing only to the above address. Telephone calls and personal visits will be ineffective as they will not be acknowledged but will be viewed as harassment.

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter and look forward to hearing from you in writing.

Yours faithfully

However for the future you should try to make yourself aware of what is required under law for both debtors and creditors, by reference to the Act and Regs, case law and posts on this and other forums.

You will not succeed by reproducing template letters, you need to know what you are saying and why you are saying it.

[winner12]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Thanks again basa48
I totally agree and alas its a sad fact that I dont understand the law fully and the goal posts keep moving
That is the reason I have tried to pay them all along at what rate I can afford
I did send the above letter to Scotcal and have heard nothing since they were the last DCA I heard from.
Cap 1 did not mention Scotcal only Credit Solutions and they have not contacted me since last year

[Garlok]

Re: reconstituted agreement

Absolutely correct basa48 in your post 11. Despite much conjecture about Waksman and the "Carey" case on several forums, our solicitors were THERE part of it and they have NOT changed their stance on our cases AT ALL since the judgement.

It is clear as you said that they may for compliance with s78 ONLY use forged documents but when it comes to the Proof Purpose the original must be provided as per sections 108 and 234 of the judgment. In fact HHJ Waksman stressed the word original. It was the banks that suddenly had to build this case law history in the lower courts over this reconstituted stuff usually against weaker LIPs. Why? Because "Carey" contains dangerous ground for them if they are brought to book on it.

By the way best of luck in court this week.

regards
Garlok