HFC-No Agreement? - Amended defence help please **WON**

[robcag]

Originally Posted by tomterm8

Well, it means that i don't understand why they are selling a debt under serious dispute, when they will only get a few pennies in the pound for it, and they have already forked out more money than they will get in court fees.

Especially since it won't prevent them being a part to the legal action.

Hi Tom

Thanks for the explanation, I can't understand it either, but then I'm not as well versed in the finer points of the law and procedures etc. as you and Paul et al are!

I think they're on their back foot, hopefully breathing their last dying gasps! (Probably wishful thinking again )

Cheers
Rob

[robcag]

Originally Posted by Hopeful1

The plot thickens eh, Rob? This seems like very strange behaviour. I will be interested to see what the court says.

There's a certain saying about bottoms and elbows that comes to mind

Thanks for your observations and comments Hopeful

With a bit of luck I'll find out a bit more tomorrow to update the thread with.

Cheers
Rob

[goorooji]

Very interesting reading...

will keep an eye out, as i am just starting out my battle with Restons/HFC.

Still awaiting CCA to CPR request, deadline wed 9th...

Good luck... G

[robcag]

Unfortunately I do not yet have any more useful information from the court to update this thread with.

When I phoned the court office earlier, after being put on hold for several minutes while the lady tried to find out what was going on, I was told that the girl who had made the last entry on the computer regarding the issue with Restons was away, and as she only works there part-time she would not be back at the office until Friday.

For some reason she hadn't put any info on the computer file even though she had apparently updated it , and they couldn't tell me anything, even though the person who I was talking to went and fetched the "folder" to have a look.

It didn't really help to be told that the person who had done the update was "generally very good at keeping things updated" .

I now have to wait until Friday for the girl in question to phone me.

Rob

[Hopeful1]

Good grief! As if the situation is difficult enough without all this malarkey.

I'll look out for your post on Friday.

[car2403]

You could ring and ask to speak to the Court Manager - that's just daft having to wait until Friday.

Ring Restons - if you get someone else, they may help.

[robcag]

Originally Posted by car2403

You could ring and ask to speak to the Court Manager - that's just daft having to wait until Friday.

Ring Restons - if you get someone else, they may help.

Hi Chris

I agree with what you say about having to wait until Friday. I might try both your suggestions tomorrow.

Cheers
Rob

[hellhasnofury]

Hello Robocag,

Restons have done the very same thing to me, told me that they would be dropping proceedings as the debt had been sold, then a week later received a letter telling me to disregard the last message, it fact it had not been sold and that they were still instructed by hfc to pursue me:o but that it might be sold in the future. Bring it on I say. Now they want an adjournment because their witness cannot make the date.

They really do like to play mind games don't they, roll on the court day

If they carry on with these stupid games, there might be a little surprise for them

[robcag]

Originally Posted by hellhasnofury

Hello Robocag,

Restons have done the very same thing to me, told me that they would be dropping proceedings as the debt had been sold, then a week later received a letter telling me to disregard the last message, it fact it had not been sold and that they were still instructed by hfc to pursue me:o but that it might be sold in the future. .......

Hi HHNF

Thanks for the info, I wouldn't be at all surprised if that is what is happening to me also

I phoned the court again a few minutes ago and spoke to a dept manager (apparently the court manager is not in today).

Long story short, no-one can find a "hard copy" (fax, letter or anything) of the "plaintiffs representation update" (I think she called it) submitted by Restons which they have a reference to on the computer file for the claim, but not in the paper file itself.

She could not find out if there was such a hard copy or whether Restons simply made a phone call to the court.

I left it with she was going to phone Restons when we finished our call, and ask them to send a hard copy.

I haven't phoned Restons yet today, but I probably will do so in a few minutes after the court dept. manager has had time to get through to them and make her request.

I wonder if I should mention to Restons that I know of another case in which they have said the same thing (selling the debt) and then backtracked.

Cheers
Rob

[robcag]

Originally Posted by car2403

You could ring and ask to speak to the Court Manager - that's just daft having to wait until Friday.

Ring Restons - if you get someone else, they may help.

Well I rang Restons only to be passed to what sounded like the same person I spoke to before, which was confirmed when he said "we had this conversation the other day". This time I asked his name which was given as "Mr. Wild", presumably J. T. Wild, Litigation Manager.

As before, getting anything useful out of him was like sucking on a stone, although he did say again something vague about the debt being sold to a third party, but this time he also mentioned that Restons were no longer going to be dealing with it.

I think we'll have to wait and see whether there is any truth in that, especially in light of what HHNF has said above.

I did manage to say to him that I had contact with someone else who was told something similar by Restons, which turned out to be false as some time after Restons had turned it around and said to disregard what they had said, to which his reply was that he could not comment on other cases, only this one.

I think they have their backs to the wall.

The longer this mystery goes on, and the more I think about it, the more appealing the idea of an application for a strike-out gets.

Cheers
Rob

[pt2537]

Well, an application may be the way to go,

of course, it may be worth also considering a claim for a declaration under section 142? to get the matter put to bed, of course, its your call either way, you could even consider it AFAIK by way of a counter claim

but it does sound rather bizzare as the things are panning out thats for sure

[robcag]

Hi Paul

Originally Posted by pt2537

Well, an application may be the way to go, perhaps after I find out from the court what this update is that Restons have submitted is all about that is what I should do.

of course, it may be worth also considering a claim for a declaration under section 142? Would that be a declaration that the alleged agreement is irredeemably flawed and unenforceable? to get the matter put to bed, of course, its your call either way, you could even consider it AFAIK by way of a counter claim

but it does sound rather bizzare as the things are panning out thats for sure yes, very strange

I wouldn't mind betting that Restons have realised they can't win as it's not another of their favourite type case where the victim rolls over and gives in, and having taken HFC for a ride and stringing them along all this time on the pretext of winning, they now want shot of the case.

Whatever it turns out to be, it's probably the Restons tail wagging the HFC dog.

Cheers
Rob

[car2403]

A s.142 declaration by the Court would determine the debt as unenforceable.

I'm not sure you can counterclaim for the debt, as it will still "exist" it just can't be enforced against you Rob? (I may not understand Paul's post, above, so probably should have clarified before advising)

[pt2537]

Originally Posted by car2403

A s.142 declaration by the Court would determine the debt as unenforceable.

I'm not sure you can counterclaim for the debt, as it will still "exist" it just can't be enforced against you Rob? (I may not understand Paul's post, above, so probably should have clarified before advising)

Sorry, speaking out loud without really clarifying what im saying,

ill take my foot out of my mouth now.

what i was saying or meaning anyway was the possibility to mounting a CC not only for a declaration but also for things like any charges added to the account along with any damages etc

thats what i was thinking