Phoenix Recoveries v Kotecha 2011  (PDF)

2. On 6 February 2007 the defendant wrote to the creditor requesting a copy of
the credit agreement under Section 78 of the 1974 Act. On 19 February 2007
the creditor responded and sent something which either was, or included, a
scanned version of the application form signed by the defendant, countersigned
for the creditor and said to constitute the agreement, or at least part of
it. The defendant argued, and still argues, that this did not comply with
Section 78 of the Act, in particular because it was not complete. Later the
defendant was supplied with what the creditor said were the terms and
conditions incorporated into the agreement. The dispute now is as to whether
this was a true copy of the correct version.