1st Credit on behalf of Lloyds TSB

[Enron]

Just had my first phone call from these lovely people on behalf of Lloyds

 

Would have thought that Lloyds TSB Bank Plc would be somewhat cautious after I got Brighton Trading Standards involved after their Indian Call Centres plagued me for a number of months.

 

I requested a copy of the executed agreement in March 08 under s78(1) CCA, the copy received being illegible and missing prescribed terms.

 

Subsequently Lloyds TSB Bank Plc did not answer any of my correspondence, only doing so recently once a default had been enterred against my credit file.

 

I do not acknowledge the alleged debt that they believe is due, and the account has been put into dispute sometime ago by myself.

 

Their recent final response noted that they do not consider the account to be in dispute, obviously I beg to differ and cited the high proportion of penalty charges present.

 

Am used to dealing with cretins, contacting trading standards, OFT etc, just wonderred what else I can expect from these lovely people - been reading up statutory demands as believe that will be their next tactic.

[42man]

Enron...though this one might be of interest....

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/135078-me-1st-credit-stat.html

[42man]

Passing debt whilst in dispute

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for the above referenced letter,although I am totally bemused as to why I have received it.

 

The author of the letter seems to have taken no notice of the present state of the account as it stands,for the following reasons :-

 

1) Last year,in the High Court banks applied for and were granted, ‘stays’, to claims for ‘penalty charges ‘on various accounts .Part of the High Court Order states that NO ENFORCEMENT ACTION IS TO BE TAKEN BY THE BANK TO RECOVER any supposed charges made by them ,until the OFT Test Case has been resolved.AND in addition should any action be taken by the Bank,then the ‘stay’will be lifted,and no doubt ,judgement would be awarded in my favour..

 

2) I am sure that Lloyds TSB conform to The Banking Code,and as such I will draw your attention to s13.6, reference information you may NOT pass on,IF an account is in dispute.The High Court Order I would suggest is reasonable evidence to assume that this account is in dispute.

 

3) I am also sure that Lloyds TSB are fully au fait with the, Office of Fair Tradings code for

Debt Collection Guidance,and I draw your attention to the latest information from their publication,July 2003(updated December 2006);-

 

The following are deemed to be at the very least UNFAIR practices.

 

a) Section 2,2 b,Leaving out or presenting information ,in such a way that it creates a false or misleading impression .or exploits debtors’ lack of knowledge.

HOW you could miss the ‘stay’on accounts is beyond me.

 

b)Psychological harassment,as described in Section 2.6 g,making threatening statements or gestures ,or taking actions suggesting harm.

Your last paragraph of your letter threatening collection agencies etc.

 

c) Section 2.6 h,Ignoring or disregarding claims ,that debts are settled or disputed ,and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment.

 

d) Section 2.6 I,Disclosing or threatening to disclose,debt details to third parties ,unless legally entitled to do so.

 

e) Section 2.6 k,Not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt

 

I can only assume that based on the above,that this letter must have been sent in error,as I am certain you would not wish it to be seen as VEXATIOUS.

 

Your letter has obviously caused me a great deal of unnecessary concern,and worry,resulting in me having to take third party advice,undergo law and internet research,and take time out from my employment,as well as postage costs,to reply to your letter., I have taken the liberty of charging Lloyds the sum of £35,which I will add to my costs against Lloyds.

 

If I have to write to yourselves again, I make notice to you that I will also charge you £35 for every letter I have to send.

 

I would also point out that I intend to maintain my legal rights,and if necassary, 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.

 

I trust you will give this due diligence,and look forward to your reply within the next 14 days.

 

Yours faithfully

[Enron]

Got a nice letter which i'm composing........ getting used to writing long correspondence.

[creditcardmug]

Have you had a Notice of Assignment from both of them?

 

I think the "bemused" letter fits the bill here,

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

Dear Sir or Madam,

Account number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

 

I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to yourselves, as it is in dispute with the **original creditor/DCA** and has been since DATE 2007.

Not only is this a breach of OFT collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998

 

My last letter from **original creditor/DCA** was DATE and intimated that my complaint would be

resolved on **DATE**, this obviously hasn’t happened.

As **original creditor/DCA** are now in default of my Consumer Credit Act request, OFT Collection Guidelines, *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.

 

Now I would respectfully suggest that this account is returned to the **original creditor/DCA** for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as **New DCA** cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities.

 

If **New DCA** 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

[Enron]

No they are acting on behalf of Lloyds, listing them as a client on their correspondence.

 

Can 1st Credit issue a Statutory Demand if they are not the creditor?

[creditcardmug]

To the best of my knowledge only the owner of the debt can issue a stat demand, however, lloyds could with 1st working on their behalf, or should i say their legal section "connaughts", but i think it unlikely.

 

in any case it wouldn't succeed with out an enforceable agreement.

[Enron]

Might run my letter by you if thats ok, always good to get a second opinion.

[underdog13]

Superb letter by 42man.

 

Just for clarification; what exactly constitutes enforcement?

 

Have read threads where some refer to DNs as enforcement others say judges have told them a DN does not constitute enforcement; totally confused now!