Another RBS S78 request question

[jon1965]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

I can't post it up here as the original is at home and I will need to scan /edit/convert it all to hide my details. What they sent was an internet application, a signed agreement, T&C's , a copy of the paper a card comes attached to with more T&Cs on the back, the most recent statement (they were sending these until the middle of last year) and a booklet that says general terms and conditions. The DN is interesting in that at the time I was over my credit limit and in arrears and it says 14 days from the date of the letter and to pay a sum that will clear the arrears and bring you back within your credit limit

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

The DN is interesting in that at the time I was over my credit limit and in arrears and it says 14 days from the date of the letter and to pay a sum that will clear the arrears and bring you back within your credit limit

I have located the case that referred to this issue and posted on the other thread where you mentioned it. As that other thread is in the restricted VIP area, I'm re-quoting my post below:

I didn't think the remedy days were working days and only came into play for service. Thing is with this even paying the arears would not have been enough to stop and breach of the agreement. I am sure I read something about this in one of Pauls Blogs or on the other site

I seem to have located the bit that refers to the credit limit being exceeded: http://paulatwatsonssolicitors.wordp...default+notice

The Judge in Mayhew said in respect of the Default notice

Was the default notice valid? Under section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act a default notice must be served before any termination or demand for earlier payment. Section 88 of the Act provides that a default notice must be in the prescribed form. The Claimant served a default notice by post of 12th October 2012. The Defendant says that the notice was defective because it gave the
wrong figure for the amount due and no OFT fact sheet was included. The Claimant explains that the difference is the amount by which the Defendant’s credit limit had been exceeded and that error was detrimental to the Claimant rather than to the Defendant. It was the Claimant’s case that the OFT fact sheet would have been included with the default notice and in the event that it was not there was a clear statement at the end of the notice that the Defendant should contact the Claimant so that the sheet could be sent. The Defendant denied that the OFT fact sheet was sent with the default notice, stated that she did not request the sheet and candidly admitted that she might not have read the whole letter. No evidence was adduced before me actively saying the fact sheet had been enclosed. The Claimant invited me to conclude that that the defects in the default notice were de minimis but I do not agree. The whole point of a default notice is that the debtor should know exactly what is owed and it is irrelevant that any defect would be to the detriment of the creditor. I accept the evidence of the Defendant that no OFT fact sheet was enclosed and words inviting her to send for the missing sheet are not sufficient to remedy the defect of its absence. It is unfortunately the case that many debtors in the position of the Defendant in this case do not read to the end of letters thus the importance of documents being enclosed.

The above also highlights a further point that's often overlooked: whether the OFT factsheet was included with the DN.

We could get PT2537 who dealt with this case and/or PlanB (the defendant on the case above) to comment on the above.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

I can't post it up here as the original is at home and I will need to scan /edit/convert it all to hide my details. What they sent was an internet application, a signed agreement, T&C's , a copy of the paper a card comes attached to with more T&Cs on the back, the most recent statement (they were sending these until the middle of last year) and a booklet that says general terms and conditions.

Ah, that sounds a lot more than what I got back from RBS and mine was not an internet application.

As you know, if you applied online from Jan 2005 onwards, a tick box fulfills the role of a signature. In any case, you say they sent you a signed agreement as well as an internet application, that would explain why yours is enforceable.

[jon1965]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

Just going to let them get on with it now. Been round so many DCA's it is getting boring

Maybe we should set up our own DCA and go over to the dark side..then we could collect our own debts :happy2:

[jon1965]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

Bit of advice please
Regal credit have written to me again saying that I have failed contact them or settle the account and it is going to go to Field agents.

My first letter to them was a account in dispute letter (S78 non compliance) along with a revoke doorstep licence
They replied saying I had never sent a CCA request
I replied telling them that I had and referred them to a letter from Natwest in 2012 that said they had complied
They then replied saying pay up or we will pass to scotcall
I finally replied saying non compliance of S78, no answer to CPUTR request and I would not enter into anymore communication with them until they complied. I also said if they thought they had a leg to stand on then issue proceedings which I would defend

As I have said I will not contact them again have I snookered myself or should I send another letter

[mystery1]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

You told them once, that's ample otherwise you're just wasting time and money.

M1

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

Bit of advice please
Regal credit have written to me again saying that I have failed contact them or settle the account and it is going to go to Field agents.

My first letter to them was a account in dispute letter (S78 non compliance) along with a revoke doorstep licence
They replied saying I had never sent a CCA request
I replied telling them that I had and referred them to a letter from Natwest in 2012 that said they had complied
They then replied saying pay up or we will pass to scotcall
I finally replied saying non compliance of S78, no answer to CPUTR request and I would not enter into anymore communication with them until they complied. I also said if they thought they had a leg to stand on then issue proceedings which I would defend

As I have said I will not contact them again have I snookered myself or should I send another letter

Been there, done that! "Bagshot Bums" 'Regal' were on my case 2 years ago, over an RBS card. I sent the usual templates you know about, then in January 2012 they passed it on to Scotcall, who said they'd either send an agent to get my field or recommend proceedings be issued in court. As I'm quite fond of my field (my back garden) and I'd rather not go to court, I sent the usual "Leave my field alone and don't visit me" letter along with the threat of litigation letter and that was the last I ever heard!

[jon1965]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

Thanks
I will ignore until Scotcall or someone else contacts me then send one off to them.
Don't think Regal can read anyway

[jon1965]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

Not just regal who can't read
Just had another letter from Natpest asking for a signature on a non existent S78 request. This is the letter I sent them

Thank you for your letter dated 24/10/2013, the contents of which have been noted. In your letter you make reference to requiring my signed authorisation.
Before I address any other issues I will address the issue of a signature
I'd like to draw your attention to the fact that the Consumer Credit Act 1974 does not require that I supply you a copy of my signature. If you are referring to the DPA then I have to ask why you have been sending copies of sensitive information, including replies to my letters addressed to Regal Credit to my home address. You must be convinced that it is the correct address, if not I am perfectly happy to bring this to the attention of the ICO

However the letters that I have been sending have not been S78 requests at all and I can only assume that someone has not taken the time and trouble to read them. The two points I have raised are that when I did send a S78 request in 2012 the documents you supplied did not fulfil the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act and as such the alleged debt becomes unenforceable under S78(6) CCA1974.
In addition I mentioned that when I wrote to you , again in 2012 to ask you a perfectly simple question, do you, or do you not , hold the original alleged agreement your response was to ask for a fee of £1 . I replied asking you to refer it to your data controller who should have understood the request. To clarify, upon receipt of a S78 request you are expected to supply me with the required documentation , namely a copy of the agreement, a copy of certain other documents and a signed statement of account.
As this account is clearly unenforceable I would expect you to cease all collection activity in line with OFT guidelines and to confirm this in writing to me
Yours faithfully,

I think it is time for a complaint that includes a CPUTR request and accusing them of underhand tactics. Gonna be a long one as there are lots of letters to quote.

[jon1965]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

Well I did send in a complaint and got a response(good means they got it) promising me an update by 6th Dec. Not happened yet but they do have a lot of paperwork to work through. Waiting for the 8 week mark then guess where it will be going...the Fobbing Off Service

I think I may be sending the same complaint about my Mint card ...."such fun"

Bugger is I have run out of Ink so am sneaking his (blood out of a stone would be easier not that I am saying Yorkshire folk are tight)

[jon1965]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

Finally got my final response which basically ignores everything I have said. What does confuse me is that they say that the fee £1is a legal requirement in 2012 but now isnt needed.
Cant decide on my next step, i know i have 6 months to go to the fos , do i wait or do it now. I am just collating all correspondence in date order.

[jon1965]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

This is the actual complaint I sent and the response

Formal complaint 14112013 EDIT.pdfNatwest Final response Edit.pdf

[jon1965]

Re: Another RBS S78 request question

Frankly I do not know if I should laugh, cry, bang my head against a brick wall or what.

After sending the complaint and receiving their response in the post above I sent another letter pointing out that they had not answered my questions and reiterating about not needing a signature for a CCA request 61Formal response to RBS 30122013Edit.pdf

Today I got a one page reply

Dear Mr Jon1965
blah blah

As a valued customer I am sorry you do not agree blah blah (valued customer ! I owe them 2700)

I believe that we've investigated your complaint thoroughly and the decision is fair

As advised in our previous response we are unable to provide you with a truecopy of your application until we have your request signed by hand by yourself. I am sorry for any inconvenience caused.


If you are unhappy with the decision and want to take it further blah blah FOS. I have enclosed a leaflet blah blah

Guess what..No leaflet

So they are completely refusing to answer the question of have they got the original and completely ignoring what the law says about signatures.

My feeling is now I will just ignore them completely rather than go to the FOS although they have mightily hacked me off

Any suggestions?