Mercers

[Birdie]

Hello

Please could someone advise - my cc with Barclaycard has been passed over to Mercers who stupidly I spoke to on the telephone and agreed £20 per month (life before legalbeagle).

Am I too late to go back to them with a prove it letter?

Thanks.

hlg43

[sam]

Re: Mercers

Unfortunately, you have, by agreeing to pay the £20 acknowledged the debt. Nothing stopping you trying for your charges back on the card if you had any though

[Paule]

Re: Mercers

Am I too late to go back to them with a prove it letter

You are entitled to ask for a copy of your credit agreement at any time
there is a template here
Legal Beagles

This is some info on the CCA
Consumer Credit Agreements - A Guide - Legal Beagles

[Guest]

Re: Mercers

Strictly speaking, acknowledging the debt only applies to resetting the Limitation Act period of six years. If they have no legal authority to collect the debt then you may challenge them.

However, since you have stated that you had a Barclaycard and the account has been passed to Mercers for collection, you have accepted that you do owe at least some money.

Do as sam has suggested however and make certain that you pay only what you do genuinely owe and not a penny more.

[Curlyben]

Re: Mercers

Mercers, nice inhouse "DCA" for B'card who will happily ignore your CCA request and pass it on to another "reputable" collection company.

Yep been there, done that and got the scares to prove it.

[tomterm8]

Re: Mercers

Strictly speaking, acknowledging the debt only applies to resetting the Limitation Act period of six years. If they have no legal authority to collect the debt then you may challenge them.

However, since you have stated that you had a Barclaycard and the account has been passed to Mercers for collection, you have accepted that you do owe at least some money.

Do as sam has suggested however and make certain that you pay only what you do genuinely owe and not a penny more.

Really strictly speaking, a telephone call can't count as acknowledging a debt for the purposes of the limitations act. it must be in writing.

[Birdie]

Re: Mercers

Thanks everyone!

[sam]

Re: Mercers

Your more than welcome.

[Birdie]

Re: Mercers

I've been going through the paperwork etc relating to barclaycard and Mercers:

10th June 2008, B'card sent a letter stating they would issue a default notice under section 87 (i) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and in addition interest will be charged to my account at current standard rate. This will take effect from 8th July 2008.

16th June 2008. Letter from Mercers on their letter head serving me with a Default Notice (?!?) and stating that they are acting as agents for Barclays. It is pretty confusing actually as it also states that if I do not take action required by the date shown then the further action below may be taken against me.

A debt collection agency will send a formal demand etc etc.

Details of your account will be registered with Credit Reference Agencies.

1) So, the Default notice was served by Mercers - how can they do this legally?

2) Who do I CCA, dispute etc?

Thanks

HLG43

[Curlyben]

Re: Mercers

CCA who ever is demanding payment.
Mercers are simply B'carps in house monkeys.

[Birdie]

Birdie v Barclaycard & Mercers!

Hi

An update:

So, I sent a SAR request to Barclaycard, they replied - please see attached copy of letter.

Birdie

[Birdie]

Birdie v Barclaycard & Mercers!

And this is my reply due to be sent today:

Further to my letter 20th August and your reply which to my surprise, only contained copies of statements from 9th September 2002, I make the following comments:

1.I requested that you forward a true record of ALL data held by your organisation relating to myself for the complete term of the account, however, you have only sent statements dating back to 9th September 2002 onwards. It is my right under the Data Protection Act that you forward me statements for the entire term of the account as there is no time limit for information requested under the Data Protection Act.

2.You did not forward any personal information you hold relating to me for the account for example change of address, signed agreements etc.

3.You did not forward any notes that have been made manually onto the account – such as following telephone conversations with myself.

As stated in my letter of 20th August 2008, I require a true record of ALL data held by your organisation and look forward to your compliance with my request. I would like to remind you that you had 40 days from receipt of my request of 20th August 2008 in which to return to me the information requested , securely and in legible condition.

I look forward to receiving the information in a timely manner and as legally requested by me.

[TANZARELLI]

Re: Mercers

LMFAO are they still trying to use the microfiche/microfim arguement. The ICO investigated them on this ages ago and ruled that microfiche is a relevant filing system.

I could have let you have a quote but all my docs have been sent off to FOS on my barclaycard due to not being able to afford the court fee. The ICO form was included in with this.

This is total twaddle for want of a better word and purely an act to stall providing docs, making them in breach of the DPA.

[Amy]

Re: Mercers

I wrote this in one of my letters to Barclaycard:-

I am sure you are aware that the Information Commissioner’s Office contacted Barclaycard for a detailed explanation of its microfiche system including how the information in it is stored and retrieved, following complaints regarding Barclaycard’s claims. Several members from the ICO were invited to inspect the filing system and to see the system in operation.

For clarity I quote from one of the Casework and Advice Officer’s that attended the inspection “Following our visit to Barclaycard, we concluded that the microfiche system used by Barclaycard is a relevant filing system for the purposes of the Act. This means that in our view the information is personal data and should have been supplied as part of your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) within 40 days and for a maximum fee of £10. As a result, it is our view that it is likely Barclaycard has contravened the sixth data protection principle, as this requires data controllers to process personal data in accordance with data subjects' rights.”

[Birdie]

Birdie v Barclaycard

Hi

Received this attachment on 31st October - apparently it is the CCA?! :noidea:

It took them over 2 months to respond to my CCA request. (I'll use this against them at a later date) :dance:

I have no documentation showing the date that the account was opened, they failed to respond appropriately to my SAR, so I have responded with this:

"SENT BY RECORDED DELIVERY: 25th November 2008

Barclaycard
1234 Pavilion Drive
Northampton
NN4 1SG

Dear Sir/Madam

Re:− Account Number xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Further to my letters of 20th August 2008and your reply of 2nd September 2008, my letter of 9th September 2008 and your replies of 16th October 2008 and 31st October 2008, I again make the following comments:

1.I requested that you forward a true record of ALL data held by your organisation relating to myself for the complete term of the account, however, you have only sent statements dating back to 9th September 2002 onwards. It is my right under the Data Protection Act that you forward me statements for the entire term of the account as there is no time limit for information requested under the Data Protection Act.

2.You did not forward any compliant signed agreement with appropriate Terms and Conditions dating back to the start date of the account. It took you over 2 months to respond to my CCA request but you have not provided me a compliant signed agreement from whence the account was opened. In fact, I have not been provided with any written proof of when the account was actually opened on any information that you have sent me so far!

3.You did not forward any notes that have been made manually onto the account – such as following telephone conversations with myself.

As stated in my letter of 20th August 2008, I require a true record of ALL data held by your organisation and look forward to your compliance with my request. I would like to remind you that you had 40 days from receipt of my request of 20th August 2008 in which to return to me the information requested , securely and in legible condition.

In addition, I am sure you are aware that the Information Commissioner’s Office contacted Barclaycard for a detailed explanation of its microfiche system including how the information in it is stored and retrieved, following complaints regarding Barclaycard’s claims. Several members from the ICO were invited to inspect the filing system and to see the system in operation.

For clarity I quote from one of the Casework and Advice Officer’s that attended the inspection “Following our visit to Barclaycard, we concluded that the microfiche system used by Barclaycard is a relevant filing system for the purposes of the Act. This means that in our view the information is personal data and should have been supplied as part of your S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) within 40 days and for a maximum fee of £10. As a result, it is our view that it is likely Barclaycard has contravened the sixth data protection principle, as this requires data controllers to process personal data in accordance with data subjects' rights”.

As Barclaycard are now in default of my Consumer Credit Act request, OFT Collection Guidelines, full Subject Access request and have also breached s10 Data Protection Act request , I consider this account to be in SERIOUS DISPUTE.

As you are aware while my Consumer Credit Act request remains in default enforcement action is NOT permitted, under s127 this constitutes a complete defence at law.

Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS.

If Barclaycard chooses to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action.

After taking advice, I am of the opinion that any continued pursuit is in violation of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well as breaching a number of the OFT Collection Guidelines

I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished.

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

Yours faithfully"


:rant:



Latest statement from them shows that I "owe" £1747.48. I opened the account sometime in the early 1990s probably around 1992.