PRA Barclaycard CCA request

[Mark0101]

I've requested a copy of my cca regarding a defaulted account with Barclaycard that PRA now own.

They have sent me what they say is a reconstituted copy, with short form cancellation, historic t&c and varried t&c.

They haven't put my full name on it just Mr my first initial and surname, no date when the cca was taken out, no mention of a credit limit.

[echat11]

Hi MARK0101

Welcome to LB

When was the account opened? If the account was opened pre 2007, then they need to supply a 'true' copy of the original agreement.

Did they tell you it was 'Reconstructed'?

I would say as it stands the debt is 'unenforceable', because of the errors you have highlighted in your post. The whole point of reconstructing an agreement is that it should contain all the info at the date you took out the agreement.

Depending on how you want to proceed, i.e. see if they initiate a Court Claim, contact themand let them know they haven't complied with your CCA 1974 request, etc..

https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/hand...ate=2016-03-07

[Matty B]

I was always under the impression that whenever the date S77-79 required a reconstituted copy to be ‘True’ whereas before Apr 2007 they needed to show an agreement was actually signed. This maybe just a difference in interpretation of words.

I remember getting a recon that had the wrong address on, had moved since inception and the recon only had the current address- clearly UE

[echat11]

I was always under the impression that whenever the date S77-79 required a reconstituted copy to be ‘True’ whereas before Apr 2007 they needed to show an agreement was actually signed. This maybe just a difference in interpretation of words.

I remember getting a recon that had the wrong address on, had moved since inception and the recon only had the current address- clearly UE

'required a reconstituted copy to be ‘True’'?

A 'True' copy is the original.

[Matty B]

'required a reconstituted copy to be ‘True’'?

A 'True' copy is the original.

With respect I would disagree. A true copy can be reconstituted without a signature. You then have to affirm you did not sign any agreement. Of course getting caught in a lie has consequences. Or at least that is what Paul Tilley has said.

[MIKE770]

pre 2007 has to a true copy original

[Matty B]

pre 2007 has to a true copy original

I remember a Paul Tilley blog where he warned of the consequences of saying you did not sign an agreement in the absence of a signed recon

This gives a flavour https://paulatwatsonssolicitors.word...t-arose-today/

[MIKE770]

deleted